Monthly ArchiveMarch 2007
National / World Politics & Personal Favorites 31 Mar 2007 06:54 pm
U Tube Videos – Ronald Reagan
Will we be strong enough to leave the shining city on the hill to the next generation?
A quiet, and reflective night after a evening thunderstorm, brought me to find and post these videos. view preferably with high speed internet connection. I will copy these over to my RWR Tribute page later.
A Rendezvous with Destiny (30 minutes)
The Decay of the Soviet Experiment (5 minutes)
Tear Down this Wall! (2 minutes)
Point Du Hoc (3 minutes)
“I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it and see it still.
And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.
We’ve done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for eight years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren’t just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.
And so, good-bye, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.”
Shining City on a Hill (3 minutes)
2005 Tribute (5 minutes)
Lady Thatcher’s Eulogy of Ronald Wilson Reagan (10 minutes)
IOWA Politics & National / World Politics 31 Mar 2007 12:58 pm
He’s Back and Stronger! – Tommy2008
Tommy Thompson came back to Muscatine to speak to a crowd of about 45 at the Button Factory this AM. Click here to read about Tommy Thompson’s January Visit to Muscatine. Read about today’s visit below.
I do like his energy, and he knows he has to win in Iowa (he said Iowa, Wisconsin and Illinois) to get the national attention he needs to continue. I also like what he had to say.
In January he was squishy on the proposed (at that time) surge and I didn’t like the fact that he didn’t seem (my impression) to even support the war effort. Today he had an only slightly different tact and it made sense.
1) Have the Iraqis vote to discover what our involvement should be (stay, limited, go). That would give us a powerful mandate.
2) Encourage the Iraqis to develop state-like governments, he said there were 18 of them today in Iraq (more useful IMO than the 3 country or region separation).
But Tommy’s best stories remain related to welfare and health care. He has a lot of executive experiences and success in Wisconsin, and he takes credit for the national welfare reform in the mid 90’s – he’s got a right to take some credit there.
I loved him talking about taking jobs from Illinois after the former Governor Jim Thompson of Illinois took jobs from an overtaxed Wisconsin – the Billboard war. At the state’s border Jim Thompson put up a billboard leaving Illinois “when you get tired of paying all those taxes in Wisconsin, Governor Thompson would invite you to move to Illinois” When Tommy took office, he lowered taxes and had an identical billboard saying the same thing about Governor Thompson wanting them to now move to Wisconsin — the other Governor Thompson.
(sad/funny thing is both of those states with Democrat leadership are taxing their citizens terribly; and Iowa is soon to follow suit – we MUST elect more Republicans to the Legislative and Executive branches of government to stop this madness)
On the whole it was an energizing time, Tommy was on message and is a good man. Candidates like Tommy and Mitt have to show me that they can turn blue states red though – they both have experience in it; but I still like Rudy’s chances better than anyone’s at this point.
Speaking of Rudy – yikes on the 20/20 show last night. I need to get to some of my favorite blogs to see what they are saying about it, can’t be good. Loved the way Barbara Walters had probably two hours of time with the candidate and his wife (some of it one on one) and chose ONLY to air video about pre/post marriage personal issues. I cringed when Rudy fell into the trap when Barbara asked “will Judith be allowed to attend Cabinet Meetings?” Shades of Hillary and the Co-Presidency “two for one!”.
What a set up. What was he supposed to say – she’s not allowed? He’ll over come this but Judith and Rudy need to be smarter than to fall into those traps set by the MainStreamMedia. The MSM have to be absolutely frightened of a Rudy Presidency. Yes!
National / World Politics 30 Mar 2007 09:10 pm
Week in review
Best Articles on the Web this week
Pelosi to the Brits “Drop Dead”
President Bush’s talk at the Radio and TV Corespondent’s Annual Dinner. Video and text at this link
Chavez takes another crazy step by stripping a bank’s assets take a link to the Chavez story here
I couldn’t get an archived link, so I will print the story below –
He’s NUTS!
CARACAS, Venezuela — President Hugo Chavez ordered Venezuela’s bank deposit protection fund to transfer its assets “to the poor,” the latest move threatening to undermine one of the country’s autonomous financial institutions.Venezuela’s Fogade insurance fund holds properties and other assets, which guarantee deposits in the banking system, much like the U.S. government’s Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
“I want all the assets held by Fogade to be passed to the Republic,” Chavez said Thursday on his “Hello, President” TV talk show.”Fogade has many warehouses, it has many properties. All that I am going to give to the people, to the poor,” he said.
“Fogade must disappear.”Chavez added Fogade has a “long list” of acquired properties that are not being put to use. “This cannot be. Pass me (the list) and I’m going to pass it on to the people,” he said.Chavez said the government would compensate the fund “little by little” for any assets that it loses.He also said banking deposits would remain insured but did not say how.
Fogade, although affiliated with the Finance Ministry, is an autonomous institution. It played an important role in re-capitalizing Venezuelan banks after a 1994 collapse of the banking system that cost the government some $11 billion in bailouts and damaged the economy for years.
Chavez also diverted billions of dollars (euros) from the central bank’s foreign reserves which are critical to backing a nation’s currency toward a state development fund that finances his popular social initiatives.Since winning re-election in December and vowing to deepen his socialist revolution, Chavez has pledged to do away with central bank autonomy altogether.
[April 2 update] here is another note from Michelle Malkin website linking to another this time, showing the end of a TV station (with pictures of the destruction). The TV station had broadcast in Venezuela for 54 years. “power to the people” wow.
I can only imagine those who create any wealth (read: create anything!) in Venezuela will start moving to FLA if they haven’t already, then who will support the government and drive the economy? Oh, what economy you say? “power to the people” wow.
National / World Politics 29 Mar 2007 07:09 pm
Michelle, Iraq & the Pres. like blogs — ah LOOK OUT!
Michelle Malkin’s blog reports a great summary of the President reporting a blog and what the MSM says about blogs — her site is great – go there, but I’m posting it all here.
——————–
The AP takes a swipe at blogs
Update: Iraq the Model responds
Update: Iraq the Model responds
Some MSM types were not too happy about President Bush citing the words of Baghdad bloggers and Pajamas Media editors Omar and Mohammed Fadhil yesterday in his remarks to the press. Check out the anti-blog editorializing in this Associated (with terrorists) Press account:
To back up his point that pulling out of Iraq would be a disaster, President Bush has quoted opinions from the secretary of defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top U.S. general in Iraq—and now, two bloggers from Baghdad. Bush made a surprising reference to the blogosphere during a spirited defense of his war strategy on Wednesday. The mention seemed even more unusual because the president didn’t identify whom he was quoting, so he seemed to be leaning on anonymous commentary.
“They have bloggers in Baghdad, just like we’ve got here,” Bush told the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
Then he began to quote: “Displaced families are returning home, marketplaces are seeing more activity, stores that were long shuttered are now reopening. We feel safer about moving in the city now. Our people want to see this effort succeed.”
His point was that Iraqi people are seeing signs of progress—and what better example of their unbridled expression than blogs.
It turns out, the White House made clear hours later, that he was quoting two brothers, Mohammed and Omar Fadhil. They write an English- language blog from Baghdad called IraqTheModel.com. Both of them got to meet Bush in the Oval Office in 2004.
In his speech, Bush was pulling select lines from an op-ed that the brothers wrote. It appeared in The Wall Street Journal on March 5.
Blogs are Web sites that tend to be narrow in focus and directed at a niche audience. Most operate without editors and give instant reaction to the news. Their freewheeling, open nature makes them popular but also ripe for unverified statements.
Don’t you know, President Bush? Only the MSM is allowed to circulate “unverified statements.” (See, for example, AP and the NYTimes and the Washington Post and the Associated Press again. Related–see also: Reuters.)
And never mind that Iraq the Model isn’t merely an “opinion” blog reacting to news, as the snobs at the AP would have you believe. They are reporting news from the ground–which is a serious threat to MSM outlets like the AP that continue to rely on anonymous stringers relying on anonymous sources feeding them unverified statements.
As for “operating without editors,” well, they’re not all they’re cracked up to be. See also: Rathergate.
***
Update: The Fadhil brothers respond to the tinfoil-hatters and critics:
I would like to say a few words to the new visitors who are not so familiar with this blog. I have noticed that our traffic nearly tripled today and that most of the extra traffic is coming from pages talking about the recent speech by President Bush in which he mentioned a quote from our March 5 article on the WSJ…New visitors, welcome to ITM! First of all we’re proud of it. It’s the ultimate ambition for a political blogger to have his or her words heard and better reach the desks of decision-makers.
Second I would like to make clear one point to bloggers like dailykos ans some MSM supported blogs who seem so upset for some reason that the voice of some Iraqis is being heard.
I’ve seen some of them publish stories full of lies and accusations they can’t support and I think it’s pathetic to throw the “you’re a sold-out propaganda” accusation at people just because they don’t share the same point of view…This only reflects their lack of knowledge and the bankruptcy of ideas they suffer.
We speak the language of facts, supported by images and statistics and more important, we live here while they don’t. We write about the good days as well as the bad days in Iraq’s journey to a better future.
Judith Weiss has all the background on the conspiracy-mongers.
National / World Politics 28 Mar 2007 06:28 pm
The Democrats Surrender
to read more click here source
———–
Pelosi asks President to “respect Constitution” on pork bill while gutting minority caucus rights for Republicans.
According to National Review Online Pelosi made a comment regarding the President “respecting the Constitution” after Bush threatened to veto Democrat’s pork laden emergency defense bill.
At a news conference today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked President Bush to “calm down with the threats…there’s a new Congress in town.”
She was asked about the President’s promise of a veto to the war spending bill that calls for a timeline for withdrawal.
“I wish the president would take a deep breath and respect our constitutional role,” she said.
Keep in mind this is coming from the party who is seeking to exploit privileged communications within the executive branch and who will make the rules for the minority party even more draconian after Easter recess.
Statements like the above from Nancy Pelosi coupled with laws which bribe our representatives to vote for defeat lead me to believe that America is in a dark time. What it comes down to is you can give them what they want and agree with them or be labeled as being “disrespectful of the Constitution” or breaking the law; or both.
Remember folks, elections have consequences.
———–
folks, these are perilous times.
our elected congresscritters no longer know what war means. they think they are doing their electorate’s bidding when they say “this war is not worth shedding another drop of American blood”. but they prove their concern for American blood by setting an abstract END to the conflict a year into the future. what does that mean about the hundreds that will die in the next 12 months; well I guess that’s ok. they will be meaningless but ok. idiocy.
the war against us, will not end if we leave Iraq. ”youths” will continue to riot in Europe, bombings will continue in India, Indonesia, Spain, England and elsewhere and eventually travel here – again.
if the democrats force our military to leave this fight in Iraq it will only prove to al-qeda that we haven’t the stomach to fight and will embolden the enemy more than ever.
question. if you were an Iraqi, would you now, today, take a job as a policeman? thanks, nancy and harry.
democrats have policitized this war in a horribily offensive way.
I seriously doubt a properly worded poll would show the American public would want to want to set a timeline to leave a battle that must be won. I seriously doubt the American people will surrender.
Global Warming 25 Mar 2007 09:09 pm
Sun’s pulses point to drenching rain
Sun’s pulses point to drenching rain
Matthew Warren, Environment writer
March 19, 2007
DROUGHT-BREAKING rains across eastern Australia have been predicted in new modelling by a scientist who believes massive pulses in the sun’s magnetic field are helping to drive the Earth’s climate systems.
If proven, the research will make the prediction of floods and droughts in Australia far more reliable and influence models projecting future climate change.
Robert Baker, from the University of New England, claims to have found a strong relationship between the rhythmic pulsing of the sun’s magnetic field and weather systems, particularly in the southern hemisphere.
The sun’s magnetic emissions are known to peak every 11 years, a phenomenon demonstrated by increased sunspot activity. The sun also switches poles every 11 years. It last flipped in 2001.
Associate Professor Baker said modelling of the sun’s magnetic activity showed high rainfall during times of high activity and drought when the sun was stable.
This suggested the fluctuations impacted on the upper atmosphere, which was in turn reflected in changes in the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI), the measure of air pressure over the Pacific Ocean used as a reliable indicator of drought and flood.
Dr Baker said the most intense droughts in eastern Australia, including the Federation drought, tended to occur every 22 years, about a year after the southern pole of the sun flipped and became positively charged.
In a paper, which has been submitted to the journal Solar Terrestrial Physics for peer review, he claims changes in solar magnetic fields can explain about 50 per cent of the variation in the SOI. The impact of solar magnetism is more noticeable in the southern hemisphere and in regions such as eastern Australia because more variable climate is driven by proximity to large oceans.
He said this relationship between the sun and climate required further research because it might help to explain an important but little understood natural cycle influencing the Earth’s climate systems.
“The sun drives the whole system,” he said. “There is a natural impact that the sun has in terms of weather patterns maybe over a century.”
Dr Baker said the sun appeared to follow a longer-term magnetic cycle of about 80 years, meaning it might be possible to predict floods and droughts for the next 30 years based on historical records from the mid-1920s.
Dr Baker said the SOI was currently following a similar pattern to that recorded after 1924 when eastern Australia enjoyed heavy falls after a period of prolonged drought.
Dr Baker’s model puts a more scientific and transparent theory to the concepts first developed by long-range weather forecasters Lennox Walker and Inigo Jones.
It also suggests there may be a longer 500-year solar cycle, which may help explain climate variability over the past centuries, including periods of unexplained climate variability such as the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.
Dr Baker said he was concerned about the welfare of rural communities amid unfounded speculation the current drought might continue for decades.
this link may not be available for long http://theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21404847-30417,00.html?from=public_rss
Global Warming 24 Mar 2007 05:19 pm
algore: i’ve shown the way…
There is too much assumption built into these Global Warming models to believe them blindly. Those who tell you it’s immoral NOT to believe in the hysteria of Global Warming are not serving science well. Morality is a judgement and doesn’t belong in this discussion. The impact of civilization on Global Warming has not been proven. Those who first believed the earth was round where labeled heretics. Let’s keep studying the facts and not make any absolute judgements. Don’t be bullied into believing what doesn’t make sense to you – ever.Don’t forget to read the “do as I say, not as I do” post titled “Simple: Al Gore is a hypocrite”. Algore is perverting science into political folly; beware, those who follow algore.
National Geographic article ”Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says”
The Congressional Working Paper, “Al Gore’s Science Fiction: A Skeptic’s Guide to An Inconvenient Truth” provides a thorough and comprehensive examination of Gore’s claims.
The OnPoint “Some Convenient Distortions” provides a brief overview of the major flaws in Gore’s analysis.Watch the video of Marlo Lewis’s presentation on the report
“Al Gore’s Science Fiction: A Skeptic’s Guide to An Inconvenient Truth,” which aired live on C-Span 2 on March 16.
(The video is in three parts.) Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
Follow the video with the accompanying slide presentation
Global Warming 20 Mar 2007 07:29 pm
Simple: Gore Is A Hypocrite
Read this to find the MSM turning on algore – related to Global Warming. Here is a teaser paragraph about a zinc mine algore has owned for 30 years – I’ll tell you how he got it later:
The Gore mines were no small operations. In 2002, the year before they shut down, they ranked 22nd among all metal-mining operations in the U.S., with total toxic releases of 4.1 million pounds. A new mine operator, Strategic Resource Acquisition, is planning to reopen the mines later this year. The Tennessean reports that just last week, Mr. Gore wrote SRA asking it to work with a national environmental group as it makes its plans. He noted that under the previous operator, the mines had, according to the environmental website Scorecard, “pollution releases from the mine in 2002 [that] placed it among the ‘dirtiest/worst facilities’ in the U.S.” Mr. Gore requested that SRA “engage with us in a process to ensure that the mine becomes a global example of environmental best practices.” The Tennessean dryly notes that Mr. Gore wrote the letter the week after the paper posed a series of questions to him about his involvement with the zinc mines.
But this is the good part – read how he “acquired” the mine 30 years ago.
Mr. Gore has personally earned $570,000 in zinc royalties from a mine his father bought in 1973 from Armand Hammer, the business executive famous for his close friendship with the Soviet Union and for pleading guilty to making illegal campaign contributions during Watergate. On the same day Al Gore Sr. bought the 88-acre parcel from Hammer for $160,000, he sold the land and subsurface mining rights to his then 25-year-old son for $140,000. The mineral rights were then leased back to Hammer’s Occidental Petroleum and the royalty payments put in the names of Al Gore Jr. and his wife, Tipper.
Folks, you can not make this stuff up. God Bless algore.
————-
HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.
HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer.
The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.
HOUSE #1
(20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.
HOUSE #2
(model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as “the Texas White House,” it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
Media Bias 20 Mar 2007 06:54 pm
Don’t bring me down… down … down…
Sorry I’ve been down since late Sunday with technical difficulties probably of my own making – Beau to the rescue.
Here are a few news bytes from the last few days.
Pro / Anti War March in DC
READ THIS to find the unreported side of the march on Washington DC last weekend.
here is a clip of this article:
It was inspiring to see the many American flags waving at the Gathering of Eagles. I documented the gathering on my site, as did other bloggers who were there like Michelle Malkin and my friend Aaron. It’s a good thing we did, for you won’t see the pictures of flags and proud veterans and citizens in the New York Times or the Washington Post. You’ll have to go to the alternative media, without which the Gathering of Eagles would never have happened, much less been reported on.
Don’t you wish you were there?
Move along, nothing to see here…
Read an article here to see something not covered at all in the MSM — but it’s now covered in Europe, quell surprise! Maybe Unions should be concerned about this government process. I wrote more about it last weekend here.
Last week, police arrested six teachers’ union leaders in an unsuccessful attempt to stop a gathering that coincided with a planned women’s rights demonstration.
CALL the ACLU!
National / World Politics 18 Mar 2007 07:55 pm
Rudy Rudy Rudy
I have officially joined the Rudy Giuliani for President Campaign and I want to tell you why. There is no perfect candidate; candidates need to grow with the campaign and inspire trust and respect related to national governance.
In my opinion, today – March 2007, the War on Terror trumps political issues.
I’m going to steal again from Glenn Beck and say:
This is what I know
You will never figure out what’s going on in the world unless you search it out. IF you allow information to be thrown at you, you will absorb what is out there, which contains significant media bias on one end of the spectrum or the other. I believe the vast majority of the bias favors Democrats. Do your own research. Let’s talk about Rudy.
- Rudy took a pit of a city and cleaned it up, reduced crime and lowered taxes and he understands that tax cuts almost without exception increase tax revenue. (as an example – he cut hotel tax in NYC from 6 to 5% and the result was increased tax revenue over 100 million dollars a year)
- Rudy took a terror struck city on 9-11 and brought it up off its knees – not alone, but through his leadership the city not only survived but found a new soul.
- The fact that he was tough on union bargining, yet is respected by much of the rank and file (you won’t year that from the Unions for the most part – they want a Democrat in office at any cost).
- He fought successfully against crime and crime families as a member of the US Attorney General Office.
- He believes in the “broken window” theory (broken windows created the perception that no one was in charge, and that no one cared). Work on the small things, petty theft, graffiti – larger things are then more practically solved.
- Presidents arrive in office more frequently from Governor’s Mansions than from the Legislature. There’s a reason for that. Governors are leading fairly independent states they have executive experience and have a track record of leadership.
- Rudy wasn’t a governor, but look at how New York City compares with US State averages (NYC would be the 11th most populous state and would produce the 9th largest Gross State Product).
(sources on request)
Opinion
No campaign will be without it’s critics and ups and downs; there will be some on this campaign. But I like the energy of Rudy’s campaign to date. And we need someone tough to stand on the world stage for us. I’m not sure W’s been tough enough against the democrat majority in the Legislative Branch much less internationally.
We have a lot to be proud of in America – and I believe Rudy is the best guy out of the current pack that can continue the mission. And, properly managed, I believe his campaign could have political coat tails. To me California, New Jersey and other typical “never thought to be Republican states” could be in play with Rudy at the lead in 2008.
I mean what do Democrats stand for? My brain hurts right now so I can’t think of ONE GOOD THING the Democrats have stood for since JFK and his strong defense policies. Can you?
Maybe I’m wrong on this point. I can give Bubba SOME credit for the welfare reform in the mid 90’s but that was mostly a conservative congress pushing through something that Bubba knew he couldn’t stop. And like any political animal, any President’s instincts say – ok, I can’t stop it so I’ll take some credit for it!
Democrat Policy statements… What Does the Democrat party stand for besides wanting to control more of your life?
Anybody? No, no, no – I know what you’re thinking – but giving away money is not a policy statement. The government doesn’t MAKE money – you and I do that. No no no – Bush is an idiot, Bush lied people died… whatever – is also NOT a policy statement. eh, this belongs in a new post.
Rudy for President in 2008 http://www.joinrudy2008.com/
National / World Politics 18 Mar 2007 04:34 pm
News You Can Use
Just click to read the articles
“Iraqis: Life is Getting Better”
Great new message board for Rudy Fans
oh, my – now I’m done for the weekend. You’ve heard that the first steps of the surge is working ok? Good news.
And you saw that poll that just came out where 73% of the Iraqi’s polled thought things were BETTER in Iraq than under Saddam? Good news.
I can’t take any more today - read this, I did…
this is about the Iraqi poll:
“irrationally optimistic, misguided in their support of the new government and in denial about the civil war raging in their country ….
“These are just a few of the devastating consequences of the Bush surge in Iraq, and I fear that we’re seeing only the tip of iceberg.”
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
another quote probably more appropriate…
Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. — Mark Twain
IOWA Politics 18 Mar 2007 12:41 pm
Iowa House Gets Nasty
With an opportunity to solidify the Democrat Party in power FOREVER; the Dems have left the door open for ‘08, especially if this insanity continues.
There are numerous bills being proposed (read my initial comment on the Iowa legislature in FEB archives) but today I’ll document those bills that made it through the funnel - as those that didn’t won’t survive the session.
So the Right to Work Law in Iowa is safe for another week.
Jeff Kaufmann is doing a great job fighting this bill, as good of a job as MY legislator is of dodging the issue and trying to have it both ways.
Nathan Reichert sat on the fence in the first two local legislative forums, basically lying with nuance – he’s Iowa’s John Kerry.
If you read my first post you read where Nate had 2 issues – would people lose jobs, and would the new bill effectively repeal the right to work bill – both of which will happen if this bill is enacted. (they just have to quit to maintain their status quo and keep from having union dues taken from their paychecks)
The Republican minority is doing an amazing job of holding the line. D-FENCE!
Please email these brave souls with your support (email Jeff and Nate too – they read everything).
Dawn.Pettengill@legis.state.ia.us
Dolores.Mertz@legis.state.ia.us
Oh, before I leave, I need to tell you one more thing. I sat in the gallery of the Iowa House for two hours on Tuesday, while they were debating the cigarette tax, and we were to the back of the Representatives.
For the entire time, Nathan was not at all engaged in the debate – about 10 Representatives were sparring back and forth – all other legislators had their laptops in front of them… Nathan spent his time cutting/trimming pictures and/or news clippings and writing notes (assumption) to consituents. No where near the laptop or the debate. My representative engaged in the process. :::sigh:::
National / World Politics 14 Mar 2007 06:57 pm
Dichotomy
Dichotomy – Etymology: Greek dichotomia, from dichotomos
1 : a division into two especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups or entities
Use, as in: Doesn’t algore think about the dichotomy of his statements?
One could almost consider the far left mentally cripped.
Again, I understand there are climate changes happening – it’s called weather. Climate is what we expect. Weather is what we get. By over-hyping the message – algore is hurting the cause, IMO.
Toranto’s BEST OF THE WEB is hitting on all cylinders today with this note about the dichotomy of algore’s “over representation of factual presentations” on global warming and the “Bush Lied People Died” people. You can’t have it both ways SHEEPLE!!!
read on….
Best of the Web Today – March 14, 2007
- By JAMES TARANTO
‘An Over-Representation of Factual Presentations’
After our item yesterday on scientists critical of Al Gore’s “global warming” alarmism, a reader called our attention to an interview with Gore that appeared last May in a publication called Grist:
Q: There’s a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What’s the right mix?Gore: I think the answer to that depends on where your audience’s head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.“An over-representation of factual presentations of how dangerous it is.” Isn’t that what people accused President Bush of offering vis-à-vis the erstwhile Iraqi regime? Didn’t this lead a certain former vice president to thunder, “He betrayed this country! He played on our fears!”?And it’s not as if Gore’s “over-representations” don’t have harmful effects. They’ve caused a lot of people to get really sad and stressed out.
Consider this report from BusinessWeek:
In recent years, the TED conference has gained a reputation for blissfully big ideas buoyed by unrelenting optimism. So few conference goers were prepared for venture capitalist John Doerr to choke up with emotion as he kicked off the second day of talks on Mar. 9.
“I’m scared,” he told the audience, looking down at his 15-year-old daughter in the front row. “I don’t think we’re going to make it.”
Doerr issued a passionate call to action for everyone to make environmental concerns their “next big thing.”
And this one from the Post-Chronicle, about someone called Jennifer Garner:
Jennifer has also confessed she cries more now she is a mother. The actress believes the experience has made her more caring.
She said: “Since I became a mother, I cry more because I care about things more.
“I can’t watch a movie where something happens to a child. And I’ve always cared about global warming and breast cancer, but now there seems to be an urgency about them.”
GORE LIED, PEOPLE CRIED!!!!
National / World Politics 14 Mar 2007 06:24 pm
Wednesday WEB Wordplay
Mr. Taranto in Wednesday’s BEST OF THE WEB (below) IMHO makes a good case against the logic of Mr. Obama in policy statements as noted below. I especially like Mr. Taranto’s use of the adage if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
We have social problems to solve in this nation to be sure; but if those problems are solved by ignoring the Taliban, al-Qaida, Hamas, Hezzbolah and other militant groups that value death more than life (their words not mine) we may not have a Republic to support in a few decades if we ignore this threat to modernity and civilization in general.
I believe the world situation is that serious. Do you? Mr. Obama, IMHO, and most of the Democratic party does not believe the world situation is as serious as I’ve described on this blog.
Best of the Web Today – March 14, 2007
- By JAMES TARANTO
Everything but the Kitchen Cynic
This column has long been skeptical that there is any depth behind Barrack Obama’s genial demeanor. Our skepticism is warranted, as The Politico’s Ben Smith demonstrates:
“The biggest enemy I think we have in this whole process (and why I’m so glad to see a lot of young people here, young in spirit if not young in age)–the reason I think it’s [sic] so important, is because one of the enemies we have to fight–it’s not just terrorists, it’s not just Hezbollah, it’s not just Hamas–it’s also cynicism,” Barrack Obama told a reception after the AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] policy conference last night. [Video is here.]
He seems to have plugged “terrorists” into his usual stump speech. As he told the DNC Winter Meeting:
“And in this mission, our rivals won’t be one another, and I would assert it won’t even be the other party. It’s going to be cynicism that we’re fighting against.”
We also found this Obama quote in Monday’s Daily Gate City of Keokuk, Iowa: “My main opponent in this race isn’t other candidates–it’s cynicism.”
Now that last comment is at least defensible. It’s hard to think of a more cynical pair than John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. But contrary to Obama, Edwards and Mrs. Clinton are not the equivalent of Hezbollah and Hamas, which are fanatical religious organizations with genocidal aims. Obama seems to think that all the problems in the world come down to “cynicism”–an excellent example of the adage that if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
Yet before he became a national figure, Obama looked like a nail, too. Consider this excerpt from a speech he gave in October 2002 in which he explained why he was against the liberation of Iraq:
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That’s pretty damn cynical. Of course it’s possible that running statewide and exposing himself to the national spotlight were character-building experiences for Obama, that sometime between 2002 and now he realized that his own cynicism was misguided and developed a more optimistic and trusting outlook.
Or maybe Obama’s hopeful mien is just a pose he has adopted for the sake of political expediency. Maybe the self-styled scourge of cynicism is the biggest cynic of all.
National / World Politics 11 Mar 2007 08:14 am
Mark Steyn (((ping)))
Here is a good summary of the debacle that started with the “16 words” in what I recall was the President’s State of the Union message in 2005 that Joe Wilson said was a lie (in a NYT OP ED piece) only later to be proved that Wilson was lying… The vendetta continued from there.
A paragraph from the article below:
……
The prosecutor knew from the beginning that (a) leaking Valerie Plame’s name was not a crime and (b) the guy who did it was Richard Armitage. In other words, he was aware that the public and media perception of this ‘’case’’ was entirely wrong: There was no conspiracy by Bush ideologues to damage a whistleblower, only an anti-war official making an offhand remark to an anti-war reporter. Even the usual appeals to prosecutorial discretion (Libby was a peripheral figure with only he said/she said evidence in an investigation with no underlying crime) don’t convey the scale of Fitzgerald’s perversity: He knew, in fact, that there was no cloud, that under all the dark scudding about Rove and Cheney there was only sunny Richard Armitage blabbing away accidentally. Yet he chose to let the entirely false impression of his ‘’case’’ sit out there month in, month out, year after year, glowering over the White House, doing great damage to the presidency on the critical issue of the day.
for the entire article – click on this link
http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/291111,CST-EDT-steyn11.articleprint
Media Bias & National / World Politics 10 Mar 2007 10:12 pm
missed this too…
They remain wary of what they see as imperialistic tendencies in other parts of the world, such as Iraq. About 80 people marched Friday under a banner reading, “Genocidal Killer, Out of Latin America!” at the site of the Bush-Vazquez meeting.
Fascinating CNN! Probably goes in Breaking News, right? (They also provided a video clip of the “about 80″ protesters)
… because this is important stuff, eh?
however –
Did we even HEAR about 10,000 (some sites report as high as 50,000) Teachers protesting in IRAN last week? They were protesting the removal of 1,500 Teachers for political reasons.
Iranian authorities are openly worried about the wave of protests also by workers in other professional sectors.
In an editorial on its mouthpiece, the magazine ‘Sobhe Sadegh’, the Revolutionary Guard Pasdaran wrote that “apparently someone is exploiting social discontent to undermine society and cause a crisis.” According to the Pasdaran, “the teachers’ protests, the strikes by labour workers, the students’ dissent along with international pressure on the nuclear issue, the explosions in Baluchistan [recent violence in the southeast province blamed on separatist groups], ethnic strife, allegations of government in-fighting and the news of an alleged illness of [Iran's supreme leader Ali] Khamenei are all part of a strategy to hit the Islamic Republic.
didn’t hear about that? I’m shocked.
National / World Politics 10 Mar 2007 08:29 am
Stuff U need to C
Click here to watch a youtube video on the history of the “run up to war” with IRAQ.
I have a high speed connection but it loaded pretty fast for me. good stuff, pass it around!
It’s important for everyone to understand how irresponsible the Democrats are being on this subject, and it’s jeopordizing your national security.
Click here to read an article about a bill that ALMOST passed in the US legislature (it DID pass in the House), narrowly avoiding the veto pen of President Bush. Under the title “Employee Free Choice Act” employee votes to join unions will no longer be conducted by PRIVATE BALLOT. How the heck is that FREE CHOICE for anyone?
This is pure political payback for the unions’ help in electing Democrats to Congress in the 2006 midterm elections. If the majority in Congress really does want to safeguard worker rights, it will continue to allow workers the ability to vote with secret ballots so that they are protected from intimidation and harassment in advance of a vote.
read more by taking the link above.
New Global Warming Documentary:
This is an hour show – smooth viewing (watch it online – let me know if there’s a problem with dial up) http://tinyurl.com/2j63qw
there is more detail on this documentary on a new page to the right named GW 3 new documentary
National / World Politics 07 Mar 2007 06:42 pm
WEDNESDAY Web Wanderings
Interesting site redstate.com
http://www.redstate.com/stories/congress/harry_reid_gets_mitchslapped
Mitch McConnell has just dropped a bomb on Senator Reid.
Earlier today, Senator Reid refused to allow a vote on several Republican amendments to the 9/11 Commission bill that would have actually made us more secure as a nation. Senator McConnell’s response was to introduce the world to the concept of Mitchslapping.
Senator McConnell just lumped all the separate amendments into one amendment and filed for cloture. So now all those Democrats who were complaining about the GOP continuing to debate the war in Iraq at the expense of the troops will have to defend continuing to debate the 9/11 Commission report at the expense of the safety of the American people.
The McConnell amendment will:
- Make it a crime to recruit people to commit a terrorist act.
- Authorize the immediate deportation of suspected terrorists whose visas are revoked on terrorism grounds.
- Prevent the release of dangerous illegal immigrants whose home countries delay their return to their home country.
- Make it a crime to encourage terrorism by rewarding the families of suicide bombers after the bombings take place. This is not a crime under current law.
- Increases penalties for those who call families of soldiers serving overseas and falsely claim that their family member has been killed.
Let’s now watch to see if the Democrats are more interested in unionizing the TSA than actually protecting the American people.
————-
http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/
Iraq The Model is a well written blog by to Iraqi brothers in Baghdad – keep an eye on that site, especially with so much going on in Baghdad.
————-
And here’s an interesting take on the missing Iranian general – sounds like a defection – get the popcorn – this could be interesting.
http://www.julescrittenden.com/2007/03/07/general-panic/
————-
I wrote my new congress critter about his recent vote in the US House on a bill irresponsibly called the “Employee Free Choice Act”. What the bill actually proposes, is it REMOVES the employees rights to an annoymous vote for Unionization in a company (can you say intimidation?). More bad legislation. God Bless W and his veto pen if it gets to his desk.
Click here to sign up to get emailed whenever your congress critter votes. This site tells you how he/she voted and gives you a vehicle to immediately email your voice in Washington.
Global Warming 04 Mar 2007 11:45 pm
Global Climate Change vs Bad International Law & Freakish Behavior
The new mantra on the Global Warming warcry is to change it to a more defensible phrase ”Global Climate Change”. Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.
Please note all this moonbat behavior is AFTER President Clinton DECLINED to push the Kyoto Protocol through our national legislative bodies or sign it himself (see this resolution – Vote [95-0] to NOT sign Kyoto). However, I think it was Michael Crichton “Environmentalism as a Religion” who suggested the “eco-terrorists” began their message around the time the Soviet Union fell. His theory was that we needed a new boogyman and the “global warming” crowd filled the vacuum. It’s just reached the LOONEY stage as they call it all BUSH’s FAULT.
In my humble opinion - before any more yelling, the Global Community should help the worst polluters in some of the newly industrialized countries who are pumping much more pollutants into the air than we are. The 10 most polluted CITIES in the world are documented here (in alphabetical order):
Chernobyl (Ukraine) | Dzerzinsk (Russia) | Haina (Dominican Republic) | Kabwe (Zambia) | La Oroya (Peru) | Linfen (China) | Mailuu-Suu (Kyrgyzstan) | Norilsk (Russia) | Ranipet (India) | Rudnaya Pristan (Russia) These cities are, what people who are really interested in solving problems would call the longest legs of a pareto chart noting Global Pollution. Global Warming is a phrase; it’s not actionable – pollution is.
The Global “climate change” freaks need to start reading about the Vikings (Greenland and the Newfoundland coasts between the 10th -13th Centuries). They might focus on actual science and known history instead of clinging to their faith in the Church of Environmental Extremism.
Weather is weather and just because there was an Ice Age or a Warming period on this planet doesn’t mean there won’t be other changes. Man’s contribution to the situation is just that, a contribution.
Climate changes certainly need to be studied and we certainly need to continue to make the air and water more pure and stop wasting resources. But, trying to pass bad international law and other such nonsense is a waste of time and energy. (Hmmm….)
……… Hmmm ………
Anyway!
For more documentation read pages on my blog here and here.
Interesting find – a 1930 article in the NYTimes with just the facts, ma’am.
A Skeptic’s Guide to Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth video on Global Warming
For Mark Steyn’s humorous take on the subject read more here.
National / World Politics 04 Mar 2007 09:49 pm
How times/stories change…
Transcript: Clarke Praises Bush Team in ‘02
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
WASHINGTON —
The following transcript documents a background briefing in early August 2002 by President Bush’s former counterterrorism coordinator Richard A. Clarke to a handful of reporters, including Fox News’ Jim Angle. In the conversation, cleared by the White House on Wednesday for distribution, Clarke describes the handover of intelligence from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration and the latter’s decision to revise the U.S. approach to Al Qaeda. Clarke was named special adviser to the president for cyberspace security in October 2001. He resigned from his post in January 2003.
RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I’ve got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.
Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998. And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office — issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy — uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.
And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we’ve now made public to some extent.
And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.
So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.
The sixth point, the newly-appointed deputies — and you had to remember, the deputies didn’t get into office until late March, early April. The deputies then tasked the development of the implementation details, uh, of these new decisions that they were endorsing, and sending out to the principals.
Over the course of the summer — last point — they developed implementation details, the principals met at the end of the summer, approved them in their first meeting, changed the strategy by authorizing the increase in funding five-fold, changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance assistance.
And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course of five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of Al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline.
QUESTION: When was that presented to the president?
CLARKE: Well, the president was briefed throughout this process.
QUESTION: But when was the final September 4 document? (interrupted) Was that presented to the president?
CLARKE: The document went to the president on September 10, I think.
QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the — general animus against the foreign policy?
CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue. This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place. That doesn’t sound like animus against uh the previous team to me.
JIM ANGLE: You’re saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?
CLARKE: All of that’s correct.
ANGLE: OK.
QUESTION: Are you saying now that there was not only a plan per se, presented by the transition team, but that it was nothing proactive that they had suggested?
CLARKE: Well, what I’m saying is, there are two things presented. One, what the existing strategy had been. And two, a series of issues — like aiding the Northern Alliance, changing Pakistan policy, changing Uzbek policy — that they had been unable to come to um, any new conclusions, um, from ‘98 on.
QUESTION: Was all of that from ‘98 on or was some of it …
CLARKE: All of those issues were on the table from ‘98 on.
ANGLE: When in ‘98 were those presented?
CLARKE: In October of ‘98.
QUESTION: In response to the Embassy bombing?
CLARKE: Right, which was in September.
QUESTION: Were all of those issues part of alleged plan that was late December and the Clinton team decided not to pursue because it was too close to …
CLARKE: There was never a plan, Andrea. What there was was these two things: One, a description of the existing strategy, which included a description of the threat. And two, those things which had been looked at over the course of two years, and which were still on the table.
QUESTION: So there was nothing that developed, no documents or no new plan of any sort?
CLARKE: There was no new plan.
QUESTION: No new strategy — I mean, I don’t want to get into a semantics …
CLARKE: Plan, strategy — there was no, nothing new.
QUESTION: ’Til late December, developing …
CLARKE: What happened at the end of December was that the Clinton administration NSC principals committee met and once again looked at the strategy, and once again looked at the issues that they had brought, decided in the past to add to the strategy. But they did not at that point make any recommendations.
QUESTIONS: Had those issues evolved at all from October of ‘98 ’til December of 2000?
CLARKE: Had they evolved? Um, not appreciably.
ANGLE: What was the problem? Why was it so difficult for the Clinton administration to make decisions on those issues?
CLARKE: Because they were tough issues. You know, take, for example, aiding the Northern Alliance. Um, people in the Northern Alliance had a, sort of bad track record. There were questions about the government, there were questions about drug-running, there was questions about whether or not in fact they would use the additional aid to go after Al Qaeda or not. Uh, and how would you stage a major new push in Uzbekistan or somebody else or Pakistan to cooperate?
One of the big problems was that Pakistan at the time was aiding the other side, was aiding the Taliban. And so, this would put, if we started aiding the Northern Alliance against the Taliban, this would have put us directly in opposition to the Pakistani government. These are not easy decisions.
ANGLE: And none of that really changed until we were attacked and then it was …
CLARKE: No, that’s not true. In the spring, the Bush administration changed — began to change Pakistani policy, um, by a dialogue that said we would be willing to lift sanctions. So we began to offer carrots, which made it possible for the Pakistanis, I think, to begin to realize that they could go down another path, which was to join us and to break away from the Taliban. So that’s really how it started.
QUESTION: Had the Clinton administration in any of its work on this issue, in any of the findings or anything else, prepared for a call for the use of ground forces, special operations forces in any way? What did the Bush administration do with that if they had?
CLARKE: There was never a plan in the Clinton administration to use ground forces. The military was asked at a couple of points in the Clinton administration to think about it. Um, and they always came back and said it was not a good idea. There was never a plan to do that.
(Break in briefing details as reporters and Clarke go back and forth on how to source quotes from this backgrounder.)
ANGLE: So, just to finish up if we could then, so what you’re saying is that there was no — one, there was no plan; two, there was no delay; and that actually the first changes since October of ‘98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?
CLARKE: You got it. That’s right.
QUESTION: It was not put into an action plan until September 4, signed off by the principals?
CLARKE: That’s right.
QUESTION: I want to add though, that NSPD — the actual work on it began in early April.
CLARKE: There was a lot of in the first three NSPDs that were being worked in parallel.
ANGLE: Now the five-fold increase for the money in covert operations against Al Qaeda — did that actually go into effect when it was decided or was that a decision that happened in the next budget year or something?
CLARKE: Well, it was gonna go into effect in October, which was the next budget year, so it was a month away.
QUESTION: That actually got into the intelligence budget?
CLARKE: Yes it did.
QUESTION: Just to clarify, did that come up in April or later?
CLARKE: No, it came up in April and it was approved in principle and then went through the summer. And you know, the other thing to bear in mind is the shift from the rollback strategy to the elimination strategy. When President Bush told us in March to stop swatting at flies and just solve this problem, then that was the strategic direction that changed the NSPD from one of rollback to one of elimination.
QUESTION: Well can you clarify something? I’ve been told that he gave that direction at the end of May. Is that not correct?
CLARKE: No, it was March.
QUESTION: The elimination of Al Qaeda, get back to ground troops — now we haven’t completely done that even with a substantial number of ground troops in Afghanistan. Was there, was the Bush administration contemplating without the provocation of September 11th moving troops into Afghanistan prior to that to go after Al Qaeda?
CLARKE: I can not try to speculate on that point. I don’t know what we would have done.
QUESTION: In your judgment, is it possible to eliminate Al Qaeda without putting troops on the ground?
CLARKE: Uh, yeah, I think it was. I think it was. If we’d had Pakistani, Uzbek and Northern Alliance assistance.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,115085,00.html
National / World Politics 04 Mar 2007 10:17 am
In the News March 4
Enjoy Mark Steyn every day by using the FREE MEDIA link to his web page on my blog (right column - and toward the bottom of the front page) but today he’s particularly funny, rounding out the commentary of former Vice President (shudder) Gore’s Green Goals…
Click here to read a printable copy of the article. For an excerpt:
Al buys his carbon offsets from Generation Investment Management LLP, which is “an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 and with offices in London and Washington, D.C.,” that, for a fee, will invest your money in “high-quality companies at attractive prices that will deliver superior long-term investment returns.” Generation is a tax-exempt U.S. 501(c)3. And who’s the chairman and founding partner? Al Gore.
So Al can buy his carbon offsets from himself. Better yet, he can buy them with the money he gets from his long-time relationship with Occidental Petroleum. See how easy it is to be carbon-neutral?
All you have to do is own a gazillion stocks in Big Oil, start an eco-stockbroking firm to make eco-friendly investments, use a small portion of your oil company’s profits to buy some tax-deductible carbon offsets from your own investment firm, and you too can save the planet while making money and leaving a carbon footprint roughly the size of Godzilla’s at the start of the movie when they’re all standing around in the little toe wondering what the strange depression in the landscape is.
Mark (and I’m not even an American) Steyn
IOWA Politics & Media Bias 03 Mar 2007 05:21 pm
In the News March 3
I’m starting to hate politics again. My biggest problem is as I’ve documented frequently on this blog, the party of the Right seems to have to fight media bias to even get the real story out.
And some of the bias is darn subtle too – check here for this story by Brian Ross. I’ll post the important paragraph below:
U.S. officials declined to identify who the operation was targeting, but indicated they were after a “High Value Target” (HVT). Official sources would not rule out that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden himself was the intended victim.
victim? really? poor OBL or is it UBL. whatever.
In honor of this irritation today I will collect a current set of examples of media bias as a THIRD media bias page on this blog. (this weekend if I can stomach it)
[UPDATE!!! March 4 - Well I never got to the Media Bias 3 page today but I did see - and this is just plain funny - they changed the wording on this site - it now replaces the word VICTIM with TARGET. All this does folks is prove the midset of the MainStreamMedia.]
———————
In other news, I feel another letter to the editor in me based on my limited attendance (had to leave early) at the Legislative forum this morning at MCC. There were 3 republicans and 2 democrats in attendance (our full delegation representing the general area of Muscatine County).
The spin in the hour I was there made me dizzy. The democrats referencing the budget, etc. used the words “good shape”, republicans noted a 400 million dollar shortfall on revenue versus spending and voiced concern. Even one of the democrats joked that we had a right to assume these people on the panel did not attend the same session.
Nathan Reickert waxed eloquently about an Energy Bill he was authoring and how it can bring business to our state. My mind wandered to one of my favorite movies of the 1990’s THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT. The premise (romantic comedy) was about a US President’s romance with a lobbyist trying to push an energy bill through Congress. The movie is a vailed insult to republicans, but I’m a sucker for snappy dialog and a happy ending.
OK Back to the forum. One of the first questions, asked each legislator to speak clearly yes or no on their support for or against the Fair Share Bill as it currently sets in committee. In the Forum last month, it was clear Nate sat on the fence, and was the only one on that fence. Three Republicans were clearly against the bill, and the one remaining Democrat was enthusiasticly supporting the bill that would kill RIGHT TO WORK in Iowa.
Senator Courtney took the mic and sounded offended by the question and started to berate the person for asking the question. He went on and on to explain how clear he was last forum (me: how about saying I support the bill and pass the mic Tom). It seemed like he tried to intimidate anyone else from speaking against the bill. Unfortunately it worked on me – looking around, the crowd was clearly partisan democrat.
I had no stomach then, to ask Nate the question “How do you explain the dichotomy of your excitement of bringing new wind plants to Iowa, versus the solid statements of two businessmen at the last forum saying they would not have located in Iowa if RIGHT TO WORK had not been applicable to Iowa law? How can you not clearly state that you will not support this bill that will effectively repeal this law?”
Nate is very careful in his use of words. He says his two “tipping points” (my words not his) are 1) will current workers lose their jobs? 2) would the bill repeal the RIGHT TO WORK law on the books today. sounds good, right?
But in his closing sentence – he said if it would repeal the law he would “probably” vote against it. “probably”. you go guy. means nothing to me and proves the questioner’s point. (BTW Nate never replied to my email last month)
The Speaker of the Iowa House was quoted this week as saying this in reference to the Fair Share Bill, “Nothing is ever dead until we adjourn.”
Be afraid, be very afraid, if you want business to grow and thrive in this state. The alternative folks is - ”we the people” supporting this infrastructure that is Iowa – all by our lonesome.
Repeal of the RIGHT TO WORK law will increase the exdous and slow the growth of business in Iowa.