Someone asked last night on what this "John Doe" stuff was about. This is an incredibly important story that the media is not telling.
Nobody can explain it better than Michelle Malkin in The John Doe Manifesto-
( Note: Earlier this month, six publicity-seeking imams filed a federal lawsuit against US Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission in Minneapolis/St. Paul. The Muslim clerics were removed from their flight last November and questioned for several hours after their suspicious behavior alarmed both passengers and crew members. Minneapolis Star Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten reported last week that the imams, advised by the grievance-mongers at the Council on American-Islamic Relations, also plan to sue "John Does" -- innocent bystanders who alerted the authorities about their security concerns. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-N.M., has introduced legislation to protect John Does who report suspicious behavior from legal liability. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty; talk show host Michael Reagan; Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, who heads the American Islamic Forum for Democracy; and Minnesota lawyer Gerry Nolting have all stepped forward to offer free representation to the imams' targets. )
Dear Muslim Terrorist Plotter/Planner/Funder/Enabler/Apologist,
You do not know me. But I am on the lookout for you. You are my enemy. And I am yours.
I am John Doe.
I am traveling on your plane. I am riding on your train. I am at your bus stop. I am on your street. I am in your subway car. I am on your lift.
I am your neighbor. I am your customer. I am your classmate. I am your boss.
I am John Doe.
I will never forget the example of the passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 who refused to sit back on 9/11 and let themselves be murdered in the name of Islam without a fight.
I will never forget the passengers and crew members who tackled al Qaeda shoe-bomber Richard Reid on American Airlines Flight 63 before he had a chance to blow up the plane over the Atlantic Ocean.
I will never forget the alertness of actor James Woods, who notified a stewardess that several Arab men sitting in his first-class cabin on an August 2001 flight were behaving strangely. The men turned out to be 9/11 hijackers on a test run.
I will act when homeland security officials ask me to "report suspicious activity."
I will embrace my local police department's admonition: "If you see something, say something."
I am John Doe.
I will protest your Jew-hating, America-bashing "scholars."
I will petition against your hate-mongering mosque leaders.
I will raise my voice against your subjugation of women and religious minorities.
I will challenge your attempts to indoctrinate my children in our schools.
I will combat your violent propaganda on the Internet.
I am John Doe.
I will support law enforcement initiatives to spy on your operatives, cut off your funding and disrupt your murderous conspiracies.
I will oppose all attempts to undermine our borders and immigration laws.
I will resist the imposition of sharia principles and sharia law in my taxi cab, my restaurant, my community pool, the halls of Congress, our national monuments, the radio and television airwaves, and all public spaces.
I will not be censored in the name of tolerance.
I will not be cowed by your Beltway lobbying groups in moderates' clothing. I will not cringe when you shriek about "profiling" or "Islamophobia."
I will put my family's safety above sensitivity. I will put my country above multiculturalism.
I will not submit to your will. I will not be intimidated.
I am John Doe.
Wisconsin Congresswoman Gwen Moore voted against the bill that would protect Americans against these John Doe law suits.
H/T Charlie Sykes
Friday, March 30, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Just keep doing your job, Congressman Ryan
I have been watching with amusement over the last several weeks as Daniel Bice from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has taken to beating up on Congressman Paul Ryan.
Mr. Bice is certainly within his rights, as a journalist, to beat up on Congressman Ryan. In fact, Mr. Bice has come up with several juicy tidbits about Congressman Ryan.
Congressman Ryan is a big boy and he can handle this stuff.
It was when I read this comment in Sunday’s paper that I finally decided it was time to write something-
Ryan then leaned on fellow congressmen and federal officials in support of this measure.
That is a pretty dramatic statement.
Really, Ryan “leaned” on his fellow congressman? Sounds like something the mafia would do to collect a debt. I get back to addressing this later.
Unfortunately, now Mr. Bice has taken to leaving out important information when reporting. Of course leaving out these important facts only makes Mr. Bice’s job of spinning the WHOLE truth a little easier.
Let us start with a few basic facts.
Paul Ryan is a Congressman. As a congressman, Paul Ryan is paid to represent every single person in Wisconsin’s first district. Yes, Dennis Troha lives and owns businesses in Wisconsin’s first district. It is Congressman Ryan’s job to represent Dennis Troha.
Of course, Mr. Bice and others will make the claim-“but, but, but…. Troha financially gained in this transaction”.”
Guess what? Many, many thousands of Paul Ryan’s constituents have financially gained from his support.
Personally, I have gained financially because of my congressman. What is funny is that Mr. Bice himself has financially gained because of Congressman Ryan’s actions.
Let me explain with a few more facts.
Paul Ryan has been a champion for tax cuts. Everything from increasing the child tax credit to individual tax cuts for every single American. Every single taxpayer in the US received a federal tax cut of 2% or higher in 2003. Literally millions upon millions of dollars were kept in pockets of Americans because of these tax cuts.
Even Mr. Bice pocketed a few dollars because of the tax cuts he received that year.
Those folks that do not support Congressman Ryan also benefit from the hard work that the congressman does.
For instance, in 2005, the UAW and thousands of autoworkers financially benefited because Congressman Ryan fought for their pension benefits. Without the fix, which Congressman Ryan personally added to H.R. 2830, the autoworkers’ pension plans were at risk.
Therefore, as you can see, whether or not his constituents are conservative or liberal, Congressman Ryan has a duty and a responsibility to do whatever he can to protect us all.
We are back to the point where Mr. Bice accused Congressman Ryan of leaning on his fellow congressman.
Really, the final vote for the bill that Mr. Bice was speaking about, HR 3-The Transportation Equity Act passed the House by a whopping 412 to 8 vote.
Honestly, how much leaning did Congressman Ryan have to do to get HR 3 to pass? With a vote of 412-8- not much, I guess.
What seems to be overlooked by Daniel Bice is the amount of transportation aid given to Wisconsin’s congressional first district, with the passage of this bill. The state of Wisconsin received more than $700 million of federal money for repair of I-94, I-43 and many other transportation projects.
I am certain Mr. Bice will continue with his gossip column filled with innuendo. That’s okay. Mr. Bice can play around in the gutter for as long as he wants to.
In the meantime, Congressman Ryan, those of us in the first district are counting on you to protect us. We need your continued protection from our over-regulating government. We are counting on you to continue to protect the tax cuts, protect our jobs, and protect our security. It is also your responsibility to make sure that Wisconsin’s first congressional district gets a fair return on our federal taxes.
In other words, Congressman Ryan, just keep doing your job and we will continue to support you.
You “lean” on whomever you have to in order to continue to protect us.
Mr. Bice is certainly within his rights, as a journalist, to beat up on Congressman Ryan. In fact, Mr. Bice has come up with several juicy tidbits about Congressman Ryan.
Congressman Ryan is a big boy and he can handle this stuff.
It was when I read this comment in Sunday’s paper that I finally decided it was time to write something-
Ryan then leaned on fellow congressmen and federal officials in support of this measure.
That is a pretty dramatic statement.
Really, Ryan “leaned” on his fellow congressman? Sounds like something the mafia would do to collect a debt. I get back to addressing this later.
Unfortunately, now Mr. Bice has taken to leaving out important information when reporting. Of course leaving out these important facts only makes Mr. Bice’s job of spinning the WHOLE truth a little easier.
Let us start with a few basic facts.
Paul Ryan is a Congressman. As a congressman, Paul Ryan is paid to represent every single person in Wisconsin’s first district. Yes, Dennis Troha lives and owns businesses in Wisconsin’s first district. It is Congressman Ryan’s job to represent Dennis Troha.
Of course, Mr. Bice and others will make the claim-“but, but, but…. Troha financially gained in this transaction”.”
Guess what? Many, many thousands of Paul Ryan’s constituents have financially gained from his support.
Personally, I have gained financially because of my congressman. What is funny is that Mr. Bice himself has financially gained because of Congressman Ryan’s actions.
Let me explain with a few more facts.
Paul Ryan has been a champion for tax cuts. Everything from increasing the child tax credit to individual tax cuts for every single American. Every single taxpayer in the US received a federal tax cut of 2% or higher in 2003. Literally millions upon millions of dollars were kept in pockets of Americans because of these tax cuts.
Even Mr. Bice pocketed a few dollars because of the tax cuts he received that year.
Those folks that do not support Congressman Ryan also benefit from the hard work that the congressman does.
For instance, in 2005, the UAW and thousands of autoworkers financially benefited because Congressman Ryan fought for their pension benefits. Without the fix, which Congressman Ryan personally added to H.R. 2830, the autoworkers’ pension plans were at risk.
Therefore, as you can see, whether or not his constituents are conservative or liberal, Congressman Ryan has a duty and a responsibility to do whatever he can to protect us all.
We are back to the point where Mr. Bice accused Congressman Ryan of leaning on his fellow congressman.
Really, the final vote for the bill that Mr. Bice was speaking about, HR 3-The Transportation Equity Act passed the House by a whopping 412 to 8 vote.
Honestly, how much leaning did Congressman Ryan have to do to get HR 3 to pass? With a vote of 412-8- not much, I guess.
What seems to be overlooked by Daniel Bice is the amount of transportation aid given to Wisconsin’s congressional first district, with the passage of this bill. The state of Wisconsin received more than $700 million of federal money for repair of I-94, I-43 and many other transportation projects.
I am certain Mr. Bice will continue with his gossip column filled with innuendo. That’s okay. Mr. Bice can play around in the gutter for as long as he wants to.
In the meantime, Congressman Ryan, those of us in the first district are counting on you to protect us. We need your continued protection from our over-regulating government. We are counting on you to continue to protect the tax cuts, protect our jobs, and protect our security. It is also your responsibility to make sure that Wisconsin’s first congressional district gets a fair return on our federal taxes.
In other words, Congressman Ryan, just keep doing your job and we will continue to support you.
You “lean” on whomever you have to in order to continue to protect us.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Interesting
Yes- We have known for a while that Troha and his wife gave $50,000 to Governor Doyle's inauguration.
What is interesting is the other groups that have also given money-
A review of state Ethics Board records shows that 34 of the roughly 75 companies and trade groups that gave to the governor's inaugural pay lobbyists or employees to influence Capitol decisions. By law, those companies cannot contribute directly to Wisconsin political campaigns.
Several of the companies and trade groups that underwrote costs of the inaugural have major issues pending in the Capitol, or were the subject of controversy in the governor's first four years in office.
For example:
• Two years ago, Doyle criticized Wal-Mart for policies that forced thousands of its Wisconsin workers to get their health care through state government. The company gave $25,000 to help pay for his inaugural.
Canter said Doyle still supports legislation preventing companies from "dumping" employees into state health care programs.
• AT&T, which has hired 15 lobbyists to push a bill through the Legislature to Doyle's desk that would require the state - rather than local governments - to issue cable and data franchises, donated $25,000 to the inaugural committee.
Canter said donations to the inaugural did "absolutely not" present any potential conflicts for Doyle, and some donors oppose initiatives Doyle has proposed.
What is interesting is the other groups that have also given money-
A review of state Ethics Board records shows that 34 of the roughly 75 companies and trade groups that gave to the governor's inaugural pay lobbyists or employees to influence Capitol decisions. By law, those companies cannot contribute directly to Wisconsin political campaigns.
Several of the companies and trade groups that underwrote costs of the inaugural have major issues pending in the Capitol, or were the subject of controversy in the governor's first four years in office.
For example:
• Two years ago, Doyle criticized Wal-Mart for policies that forced thousands of its Wisconsin workers to get their health care through state government. The company gave $25,000 to help pay for his inaugural.
Canter said Doyle still supports legislation preventing companies from "dumping" employees into state health care programs.
• AT&T, which has hired 15 lobbyists to push a bill through the Legislature to Doyle's desk that would require the state - rather than local governments - to issue cable and data franchises, donated $25,000 to the inaugural committee.
Canter said donations to the inaugural did "absolutely not" present any potential conflicts for Doyle, and some donors oppose initiatives Doyle has proposed.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
You first- Eugene Kane
In today’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Eugene Kane asks the question-
Where's anger when victim is black?
Eugene Kane wants to know why nobody cared about a murder that took place a few weeks ago involving a black man. Instead, when a white man is murdered in the inner city, then people become outraged.
That is a good question.
Unfortunately, Mr. Kane needs to be looking in the mirror when he asks the question.
I read the previous story that Mr. Kane had written about Prentice Barnes. Here is Eugene Kane’s entire reflection about Prentice Barnes-
Last week, another shocking murder happened in broad daylight. Police say Prentice Barnes, 55, the driver of a medical van, was shot in a crossfire while stopped at N. 39th and W. Center streets.
More than likely, it started out as a typical morning for Barnes. Who expects to die at 11 a.m.?
That is it, folks. Nothing else. This is all Eugene Kane had to say about Prentice Barnes.
In fact, Mr. Kane spent more time talking about his own drive thru the inner city than he did anything else.
Why is that, Mr. Kane? Why is it you spent more time talking about yourself than you did Prentice Barnes?
Did Eugene Kane or anyone else from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel every bother visiting Prentice Barnes’ family? Did anyone bother to check on what kind of life Prentice Barnes might have lead?
We know nothing about Prentice Barnes because Eugene Kane or anyone else ever bothered to tell us.
Eugene Kane has the incredible opportunity to be a reflection of Milwaukee’s inner city. He could be writing about the hopes, dreams, fears and anxieties facing today’s inner city families.
Instead, what we continue to hear from Eugene Kane is how outraged he is at the Milwaukee Police Department.
We even hear about how outraged Eugene Kane is about all of the fuss and muss over the beating of a white man on a city bus.
However- what we did not really hear about is Prentice Barnes.
Eugene Kane wants us to be outraged over the daytime murder of Prentice Barnes. Okay- we can do that.
However, we need inner city leaders in Milwaukee, like Eugene Kane, to start telling us what is going on in Milwaukee.
Look in the mirror, Eugene Kane. You need to become outraged first. Then tell us about the people like Prentice Barnes and we will become outraged with you.
Eugene Kane- you need to stop talking about yourself and introduce us to people like Prentice Barnes.
Maybe then, all of us as a community can start dealing with the culture of death that has gripped Milwaukee’s inner city.
Until that day comes, the rest of us are left wondering what in the world is going on in Milwaukee.
Where's anger when victim is black?
Eugene Kane wants to know why nobody cared about a murder that took place a few weeks ago involving a black man. Instead, when a white man is murdered in the inner city, then people become outraged.
That is a good question.
Unfortunately, Mr. Kane needs to be looking in the mirror when he asks the question.
I read the previous story that Mr. Kane had written about Prentice Barnes. Here is Eugene Kane’s entire reflection about Prentice Barnes-
Last week, another shocking murder happened in broad daylight. Police say Prentice Barnes, 55, the driver of a medical van, was shot in a crossfire while stopped at N. 39th and W. Center streets.
More than likely, it started out as a typical morning for Barnes. Who expects to die at 11 a.m.?
That is it, folks. Nothing else. This is all Eugene Kane had to say about Prentice Barnes.
In fact, Mr. Kane spent more time talking about his own drive thru the inner city than he did anything else.
Why is that, Mr. Kane? Why is it you spent more time talking about yourself than you did Prentice Barnes?
Did Eugene Kane or anyone else from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel every bother visiting Prentice Barnes’ family? Did anyone bother to check on what kind of life Prentice Barnes might have lead?
We know nothing about Prentice Barnes because Eugene Kane or anyone else ever bothered to tell us.
Eugene Kane has the incredible opportunity to be a reflection of Milwaukee’s inner city. He could be writing about the hopes, dreams, fears and anxieties facing today’s inner city families.
Instead, what we continue to hear from Eugene Kane is how outraged he is at the Milwaukee Police Department.
We even hear about how outraged Eugene Kane is about all of the fuss and muss over the beating of a white man on a city bus.
However- what we did not really hear about is Prentice Barnes.
Eugene Kane wants us to be outraged over the daytime murder of Prentice Barnes. Okay- we can do that.
However, we need inner city leaders in Milwaukee, like Eugene Kane, to start telling us what is going on in Milwaukee.
Look in the mirror, Eugene Kane. You need to become outraged first. Then tell us about the people like Prentice Barnes and we will become outraged with you.
Eugene Kane- you need to stop talking about yourself and introduce us to people like Prentice Barnes.
Maybe then, all of us as a community can start dealing with the culture of death that has gripped Milwaukee’s inner city.
Until that day comes, the rest of us are left wondering what in the world is going on in Milwaukee.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Thanks
I just wanted to send out a great big thank you to everyone involved with the Republican Party of Kenosha's Lincoln Day Dinner.
The night was a great success.
The speakers included Congressman Paul Ryan, former Congressman Mark Neumann, State Rep. Samantha Kerkman, Milwaukee County Exec. Scott Walker and State Supreme Court candidate Annette Ziegler.
There were many other elected local officials in attendance and we thank you all.
It was great night with a full house.
Thanks to everyone who donated auction items and all those that purchased auction items.
I am looking forward to a great year.
The night was a great success.
The speakers included Congressman Paul Ryan, former Congressman Mark Neumann, State Rep. Samantha Kerkman, Milwaukee County Exec. Scott Walker and State Supreme Court candidate Annette Ziegler.
There were many other elected local officials in attendance and we thank you all.
It was great night with a full house.
Thanks to everyone who donated auction items and all those that purchased auction items.
I am looking forward to a great year.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Real Debate Wisconsin: Happy Anniversary.
Real Debate Wisconsin: Happy Anniversary.
Just for my friend RDW- check out this website-
Virtual Bubble-wrap that you can pop-
http://www.virtual-bubblewrap.com/popnow.shtml
Just for my friend RDW- check out this website-
Virtual Bubble-wrap that you can pop-
http://www.virtual-bubblewrap.com/popnow.shtml
"Shame on Pelosi"
These days, I am busier than a one armed paper hanger. However, I had to take time to post the following.
This is an editorial from the San-Diego Union Tribune.
It is doubtful you will ever see an editorial like this in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Shame on Pelosi
Buying war-policy votes with pork is pathetic
March 23, 2007
Democrats wasted no time after their takeover of Congress in November in declaring a new era of responsible government. Party leaders said earmarks and massive, blithe pork-barrel spending would be a thing of the past. “We promise the most honest, most open, most ethical Congress in history,” declared House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Initially, Democrats seemed to live up to their grand talk. To the amazement of many, incoming Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd – the West Virginia Democrat who may be the biggest pork abuser of all – joined with incoming House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey to vow there would be no new earmarks until the next fiscal year began on Oct. 1.
This was all wonderful, welcome and overdue. Federal spending has been out of control since the final years of the Clinton administration. While earmarks and pork are only a relatively small part of the reason why, controlling them would be a welcome sign of a newly sober, adult attitude on Congress' part.
Too bad it was all a charade. What's going on this week in the House is as appalling an exercise in pork-politics vote-buying as anything seen when Republicans Dennis Hastert and Tom DeLay were in control – especially because the vote-buying involves an issue of the utmost gravity.
Weeks ago, Pelosi proposed attaching a requirement that U.S. troops come home from Iraq before September 2008 to an emergency $100 billion military appropriations bill. When it became apparent she didn't have enough votes, she responded by adding $24 billion in pork, often in the form of agricultural subsidies used to win over rural Democratic lawmakers who tend to be more deferential on war policy.
This is disgusting. That Pelosi insists this extra spending doesn't qualify as pork is bad enough. But the idea that taxpayer funds are being doled out by the multibillion for unrelated domestic programs to influence a profoundly important vote on Iraq should offend everyone. What does it say for the dozens of House members that this tactic apparently swayed? That on any issue, there is a price at which their convictions are for sale?
“A great nation deserves better,” Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, said yesterday as the House debated the $124 billion spending measure. He's absolutely right. In 2004, a unanimous House ethics committee voted to rebuke then-Majority Leader DeLay for his tactics in attempting to persuade Rep. Nick Smith, R-Mich., to support a 2003 bill adding prescription-drug benefits to Medicare. DeLay's offense, according to the official panel report: “DeLay offered to endorse Rep. Smith's son [to replace him after he retired] in exchange for Rep. Smith's vote in favor of the Medicare bill.”
If that merits a formal rebuke, trying to use $24 billion in taxpayer money to sway a vote on war policy deserves a prison term.
A final House vote on the bill is likely today. If Pelosi gets her way, it will be national disgrace. Her tactics could not be less honest, less open or less ethical.
Well, as we all know- Pelosi got her way and it is a national disgrace!
This is an editorial from the San-Diego Union Tribune.
It is doubtful you will ever see an editorial like this in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Shame on Pelosi
Buying war-policy votes with pork is pathetic
March 23, 2007
Democrats wasted no time after their takeover of Congress in November in declaring a new era of responsible government. Party leaders said earmarks and massive, blithe pork-barrel spending would be a thing of the past. “We promise the most honest, most open, most ethical Congress in history,” declared House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Initially, Democrats seemed to live up to their grand talk. To the amazement of many, incoming Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd – the West Virginia Democrat who may be the biggest pork abuser of all – joined with incoming House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey to vow there would be no new earmarks until the next fiscal year began on Oct. 1.
This was all wonderful, welcome and overdue. Federal spending has been out of control since the final years of the Clinton administration. While earmarks and pork are only a relatively small part of the reason why, controlling them would be a welcome sign of a newly sober, adult attitude on Congress' part.
Too bad it was all a charade. What's going on this week in the House is as appalling an exercise in pork-politics vote-buying as anything seen when Republicans Dennis Hastert and Tom DeLay were in control – especially because the vote-buying involves an issue of the utmost gravity.
Weeks ago, Pelosi proposed attaching a requirement that U.S. troops come home from Iraq before September 2008 to an emergency $100 billion military appropriations bill. When it became apparent she didn't have enough votes, she responded by adding $24 billion in pork, often in the form of agricultural subsidies used to win over rural Democratic lawmakers who tend to be more deferential on war policy.
This is disgusting. That Pelosi insists this extra spending doesn't qualify as pork is bad enough. But the idea that taxpayer funds are being doled out by the multibillion for unrelated domestic programs to influence a profoundly important vote on Iraq should offend everyone. What does it say for the dozens of House members that this tactic apparently swayed? That on any issue, there is a price at which their convictions are for sale?
“A great nation deserves better,” Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, said yesterday as the House debated the $124 billion spending measure. He's absolutely right. In 2004, a unanimous House ethics committee voted to rebuke then-Majority Leader DeLay for his tactics in attempting to persuade Rep. Nick Smith, R-Mich., to support a 2003 bill adding prescription-drug benefits to Medicare. DeLay's offense, according to the official panel report: “DeLay offered to endorse Rep. Smith's son [to replace him after he retired] in exchange for Rep. Smith's vote in favor of the Medicare bill.”
If that merits a formal rebuke, trying to use $24 billion in taxpayer money to sway a vote on war policy deserves a prison term.
A final House vote on the bill is likely today. If Pelosi gets her way, it will be national disgrace. Her tactics could not be less honest, less open or less ethical.
Well, as we all know- Pelosi got her way and it is a national disgrace!
Friday, March 23, 2007
Bribing votes
In a few short hours we will find out whether or not Nancy Pelosi was able to bribe enough votes to set a time line for withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Since Pelosi cannot get the votes legitimately- they loaded the bill with pork projects to bribe congressman.
We will see if it will work.
It certainly does not matter either way. The bill will not make it thru the Senate very easily.
If even it makes it thru- the President will veto.
Since Pelosi cannot get the votes legitimately- they loaded the bill with pork projects to bribe congressman.
We will see if it will work.
It certainly does not matter either way. The bill will not make it thru the Senate very easily.
If even it makes it thru- the President will veto.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Prayers up for Elizabeth Edwards
I will be quite honest- I do not like John Edward's politics.
However, politics is one thing- cancer is another thing all together.
Wow- prayers for the entire Edwards family. Cancer is frightening and they both seem to be handling this with a positive attitude.
God bless the Edwards family as they challenge this disease head on.
However, politics is one thing- cancer is another thing all together.
Wow- prayers for the entire Edwards family. Cancer is frightening and they both seem to be handling this with a positive attitude.
God bless the Edwards family as they challenge this disease head on.
Insurgents and Democrats are on the same page
Now this is interesting-
Insurgents and Democrats are on the same page
From USA Today-
Speaking to The Associated Press in a telephone interview Thursday, al-Muttalibi said the negotiations were deadlocked over the insurgent groups' insistence that they would lay down their arms only when a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition troops in Iraq is announced.
From Yahoo-
In the Senate, the Appropriations Committee bill would require troops to start coming home in four months. Unlike the House bill, which sets a firm deadline for combat operations to cease, the $122 billion Senate bill identifies a nonbinding goal of getting troops out by March 31, 2008
The Democrats must feel awful proud that they are calling for the same timetable that the terrorists are calling for.
The terrorists want America out of Iraq, so do the Democrats
Insurgents and Democrats are on the same page
From USA Today-
Speaking to The Associated Press in a telephone interview Thursday, al-Muttalibi said the negotiations were deadlocked over the insurgent groups' insistence that they would lay down their arms only when a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition troops in Iraq is announced.
From Yahoo-
In the Senate, the Appropriations Committee bill would require troops to start coming home in four months. Unlike the House bill, which sets a firm deadline for combat operations to cease, the $122 billion Senate bill identifies a nonbinding goal of getting troops out by March 31, 2008
The Democrats must feel awful proud that they are calling for the same timetable that the terrorists are calling for.
The terrorists want America out of Iraq, so do the Democrats
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
How convenient
How convenient-
Calendar entries for state Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi and his top assistant have been erased, making it impossible to know where they were for their first two years in office.
The Journal Sentinel recently requested Busalacchi's calendar going back to January 2003, but the Department of Transportation said his calendars for 2003 and 2004 were accidentally destroyed because of a problem with a computer server. Deputy Secretary Ruben Anthony Jr.'s calendars also are missing for those years.
Busalacchi has said he never talked to now-indicted Kenosha businessman Dennis Troha about tax troubles faced by companies Troha owned at the time. Busalacchi was to meet with Troha on the issue in April 2004, but Busalacchi said Troha - a major contributor to Gov. Jim Doyle - did not show up for the meeting.
The Journal Sentinel asked for Busalacchi's schedule to see how involved he was in the tax cases affecting Troha's firms. But the Department of Transportation said this week that it did not have the calendars for 2003 and 2004.
continued...
A cynical person might actually start to think that the DOT was trying to cover something up.
Calendar entries for state Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi and his top assistant have been erased, making it impossible to know where they were for their first two years in office.
The Journal Sentinel recently requested Busalacchi's calendar going back to January 2003, but the Department of Transportation said his calendars for 2003 and 2004 were accidentally destroyed because of a problem with a computer server. Deputy Secretary Ruben Anthony Jr.'s calendars also are missing for those years.
Busalacchi has said he never talked to now-indicted Kenosha businessman Dennis Troha about tax troubles faced by companies Troha owned at the time. Busalacchi was to meet with Troha on the issue in April 2004, but Busalacchi said Troha - a major contributor to Gov. Jim Doyle - did not show up for the meeting.
The Journal Sentinel asked for Busalacchi's schedule to see how involved he was in the tax cases affecting Troha's firms. But the Department of Transportation said this week that it did not have the calendars for 2003 and 2004.
continued...
A cynical person might actually start to think that the DOT was trying to cover something up.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Why the shock?
After reading today's article on Dennis Troha, I don't understand why so many people are shocked about the Troha indictment.
"I just was really surprised and shocked," Kenosha Ald. Kenneth Polzin Jr., a casino opponent, said of the formal accusations earlier this month that Troha engineered illegal contributions to Doyle and lied about it to the FBI. " . . . It's totally out of character, out of his public persona."
It is a well know fact in Kenosha, if you opposed the casino, you met with trouble. You were up against big money and you did not stand a chance.
Still- 44% of Kenosha voted against the casino in 2004.
Not everyone wanted a casino or the corruption it would bring.
"I just was really surprised and shocked," Kenosha Ald. Kenneth Polzin Jr., a casino opponent, said of the formal accusations earlier this month that Troha engineered illegal contributions to Doyle and lied about it to the FBI. " . . . It's totally out of character, out of his public persona."
It is a well know fact in Kenosha, if you opposed the casino, you met with trouble. You were up against big money and you did not stand a chance.
Still- 44% of Kenosha voted against the casino in 2004.
Not everyone wanted a casino or the corruption it would bring.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Mark Green did NOT break the law!
Boy, this is infuriating. Several months after the fact, the State Elections Board now admits they gave Mark Green bad advice.
Mark Green DID not break the law!
WisPolitics: Green, SEB Reach Deal on Money Dispute
3/16/2007
By WisPolitics Staff
Mark Green and the state Elections Board reached an agreement today that stipulates the Republican was following precedence and advice he received from board staff when he converted money from his congressional account to his gubernatorial fund.
But the deal also states the board was following its interpretation of the law when it ordered the Republican to dump some $468,000 money from out-of-state PACs that was included in the conversion.
The deal also puts limits on how Green can use the money. The agreement also calls for the end of the lawsuit Green filed over the board's action. That case is pending before the state Supreme Court.
Mark Green DID not break the law!
WisPolitics: Green, SEB Reach Deal on Money Dispute
3/16/2007
By WisPolitics Staff
Mark Green and the state Elections Board reached an agreement today that stipulates the Republican was following precedence and advice he received from board staff when he converted money from his congressional account to his gubernatorial fund.
But the deal also states the board was following its interpretation of the law when it ordered the Republican to dump some $468,000 money from out-of-state PACs that was included in the conversion.
The deal also puts limits on how Green can use the money. The agreement also calls for the end of the lawsuit Green filed over the board's action. That case is pending before the state Supreme Court.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
I am surprised
After all the trash talk for weeks about the Democrats forcing the President to pull troops out of Iraq- the Senate Democrats could not even muster a simple majority.
In the Senate, after weeks of skirmishing, Republicans easily turned back Democratic legislation requiring a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days. The measure set no fixed deadline for completion of the redeployment, but set a goal of March 31, 2008. The vote was 50-48 against the measure, 12 short of the 60 needed for passage.
In order for the bill to pass- they would have needed a super majority.
In the Senate, after weeks of skirmishing, Republicans easily turned back Democratic legislation requiring a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days. The measure set no fixed deadline for completion of the redeployment, but set a goal of March 31, 2008. The vote was 50-48 against the measure, 12 short of the 60 needed for passage.
In order for the bill to pass- they would have needed a super majority.
9/11 mastermind confesses
The suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 hijackings confessed at a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that he organized those attacks plus many more, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.
"I am responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told military investigators, the transcript says.
continued...
Perhaps someone should tell Kevin Barrett and his friends that Vice President Dick Cheney was not behind the attacks on 9/11.
"I am responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told military investigators, the transcript says.
continued...
Perhaps someone should tell Kevin Barrett and his friends that Vice President Dick Cheney was not behind the attacks on 9/11.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Does this makes sense to you?
Okay- this is rich.
Let me see if I have this straight.
According to the Democrats, President George Bush is not allowed to fire US Attorneys that President Bush, himself, hired. In fact, they are holding hearings up on the hill for this right now.
However- currently the Democrats are putting political pressure on President Bush to fire the country’s head attorney.
Basically President Bush is in trouble for firing people for political reasons, but the Democrats are demanding that President Bush fire the Attorney General for political reasons????
Now that does not make sense to me at all.
Let me see if I have this straight.
According to the Democrats, President George Bush is not allowed to fire US Attorneys that President Bush, himself, hired. In fact, they are holding hearings up on the hill for this right now.
However- currently the Democrats are putting political pressure on President Bush to fire the country’s head attorney.
Basically President Bush is in trouble for firing people for political reasons, but the Democrats are demanding that President Bush fire the Attorney General for political reasons????
Now that does not make sense to me at all.
More hypocrisy from the Clinton's
Really- should Hillary Clinton be talking about firings for political reasons?
"I'm deeply disturbed by what we have learned thus far," Clinton said, "and I join those who are calling for a full and thorough investigation to try to get to the bottom of these very political decisions that interfere with prosecutorial responsibility by U.S. attorneys, and I think that the attorney general should resign."
This statement from Clinton is almost laughable.
Remember Travelgate?
"I'm deeply disturbed by what we have learned thus far," Clinton said, "and I join those who are calling for a full and thorough investigation to try to get to the bottom of these very political decisions that interfere with prosecutorial responsibility by U.S. attorneys, and I think that the attorney general should resign."
This statement from Clinton is almost laughable.
Remember Travelgate?
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Dems are backing off
In the battle between President Bush and the new Democrat leaders in Washington, the new Democrats are being forced to back down.
Democratic leaders are stripping from a military spending bill for the war in Iraq a requirement that President Bush gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other leaders agreed to remove the requirement concerning Iran after conservative Democrats as well as other lawmakers worried about its possible impact on Israel, officials said Monday.
The Democrats are backing down. Perhaps cooler heads are beginning to prevail on the Democrats side of the aisle.
Less than two months ago- Reid and Pelosi were declaring that Bush has "no authority" to launch any military options against Iran.
As you can see, the Dems had to rethink this strategy because their are others in their own caucus that are not supporting this.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in an interview that there is widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which is believed to be seeking nuclear weapons and has expressed unremitting hostility about the Jewish state.
"It would take away perhaps the most important negotiating tool that the U.S. has when it comes to Iran," she said of the now-abandoned provision.
"I didn't think it was a very wise idea to take things off the table if you're trying to get people to modify their behavior and normalize it in a civilized way," said Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.
Several officials said there was widespread opposition to the proposal at a closed-door meeting last week of conservative and moderate Democrats, who said they feared tying the hands of the administration when dealing with an unpredictable and potentially hostile regime in Tehran.
Next on the Democrats chopping block?
It appears that the Democrats may also have to back down from their own time line they created for withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Even as the media is touting the additional provision for withdrawing troops in Iraq, we now see that this may be in danger of being removed also-
The overall bill — which requires that the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Sept. 1, 2008, if not earlier — remained on schedule for an initial test vote Thursday in the House Appropriations Committee.
There appears to be some Democratic opposition to this plan-
"This supplemental should be about supporting the troops and providing what they need," Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., said Monday upon returning from Iraq. Boren said he plans to oppose any legislation setting a clear deadline for troops to leave.
Let's hope that calmer, cooler and brighter minds prevail in the Democratic caucus.
As it is, all we have heard from the Democrats is constant shrieking about Iraq since they have taken over.
The MoveOn.org people have such a strangle hold on the Democrats, that the Democrats are now beginning to look foolish.
Democratic leaders are stripping from a military spending bill for the war in Iraq a requirement that President Bush gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other leaders agreed to remove the requirement concerning Iran after conservative Democrats as well as other lawmakers worried about its possible impact on Israel, officials said Monday.
The Democrats are backing down. Perhaps cooler heads are beginning to prevail on the Democrats side of the aisle.
Less than two months ago- Reid and Pelosi were declaring that Bush has "no authority" to launch any military options against Iran.
As you can see, the Dems had to rethink this strategy because their are others in their own caucus that are not supporting this.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in an interview that there is widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which is believed to be seeking nuclear weapons and has expressed unremitting hostility about the Jewish state.
"It would take away perhaps the most important negotiating tool that the U.S. has when it comes to Iran," she said of the now-abandoned provision.
"I didn't think it was a very wise idea to take things off the table if you're trying to get people to modify their behavior and normalize it in a civilized way," said Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.
Several officials said there was widespread opposition to the proposal at a closed-door meeting last week of conservative and moderate Democrats, who said they feared tying the hands of the administration when dealing with an unpredictable and potentially hostile regime in Tehran.
Next on the Democrats chopping block?
It appears that the Democrats may also have to back down from their own time line they created for withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Even as the media is touting the additional provision for withdrawing troops in Iraq, we now see that this may be in danger of being removed also-
The overall bill — which requires that the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Sept. 1, 2008, if not earlier — remained on schedule for an initial test vote Thursday in the House Appropriations Committee.
There appears to be some Democratic opposition to this plan-
"This supplemental should be about supporting the troops and providing what they need," Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., said Monday upon returning from Iraq. Boren said he plans to oppose any legislation setting a clear deadline for troops to leave.
Let's hope that calmer, cooler and brighter minds prevail in the Democratic caucus.
As it is, all we have heard from the Democrats is constant shrieking about Iraq since they have taken over.
The MoveOn.org people have such a strangle hold on the Democrats, that the Democrats are now beginning to look foolish.
Monday, March 12, 2007
Are we just being meanies?
Apparently, according to the Democrats(some Republicans) and the ACLU, we are just being meanies.
There are currently, some bills floating around Congress that will lower the punishment for drug dealers and drug users of crack cocaine.
Momentum is building in Congress to ease crack cocaine sentencing guidelines, which the American Civil Liberties Union and other critics say have filled prisons with low-level drug dealers and addicts whose punishments were much worse than their crimes.
Federal prison sentences for possessing or selling crack have far exceeded those for powder cocaine for two decades. House Crime Subcommittee chairman Robert Scott, D-Va., a longtime critic of such sentencing policies, plans to hold hearings on crack sentences this year. In the Senate, Republican Jeff Sessions of Alabama is drawing bipartisan support for his proposal to ease crack sentences.
cont...
Here is another news flash- Crack Cocaine still kills
Now Congress and the ACLU want to make life easier on crack cocaine dealers that are selling their crack on America's streets.
Here are some statitics that Congress may want to mull on before making life easier on drug dealers.
In 2004, 34.2 million Americans aged 12 and over reported lifetime use of cocaine, and 7.8 million reported using crack. About 5.6 million reported annual use of cocaine, and 1.3 million reported using crack. An estimated 2 million Americans reported current use of cocaine, 467,000 of whom reported using crack. There were an estimated 1 million new users of cocaine in 2004 (approximately 2,700 per day), and most were aged 18 or older although the average age of first use was 20.0 years.
I guess the war on drugs is officially over for the US Congress. Apparently that war is also too hard to fight.
There are currently, some bills floating around Congress that will lower the punishment for drug dealers and drug users of crack cocaine.
Momentum is building in Congress to ease crack cocaine sentencing guidelines, which the American Civil Liberties Union and other critics say have filled prisons with low-level drug dealers and addicts whose punishments were much worse than their crimes.
Federal prison sentences for possessing or selling crack have far exceeded those for powder cocaine for two decades. House Crime Subcommittee chairman Robert Scott, D-Va., a longtime critic of such sentencing policies, plans to hold hearings on crack sentences this year. In the Senate, Republican Jeff Sessions of Alabama is drawing bipartisan support for his proposal to ease crack sentences.
cont...
Here is another news flash- Crack Cocaine still kills
Now Congress and the ACLU want to make life easier on crack cocaine dealers that are selling their crack on America's streets.
Here are some statitics that Congress may want to mull on before making life easier on drug dealers.
In 2004, 34.2 million Americans aged 12 and over reported lifetime use of cocaine, and 7.8 million reported using crack. About 5.6 million reported annual use of cocaine, and 1.3 million reported using crack. An estimated 2 million Americans reported current use of cocaine, 467,000 of whom reported using crack. There were an estimated 1 million new users of cocaine in 2004 (approximately 2,700 per day), and most were aged 18 or older although the average age of first use was 20.0 years.
I guess the war on drugs is officially over for the US Congress. Apparently that war is also too hard to fight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)