January 5-7, 2007
Jan 05 01:53 The Shakeup Continues Jan 05 12:49 DFL Legislature's 'Legacy' Jan 06 09:02 Democrats' Fast Track to Energy Independence? Jan 06 09:51 Boxer Does the Right Thing Jan 06 11:43 Andy Aplikowski Gets Rodney Dangerfield 'Award' Jan 06 13:23 Pull Their Licenses Jan 06 22:58 A Gracious Op-ed Jan 07 02:36 Israel Preparing Nuke Attack on Natanz Jan 07 21:56 Joe Kennedy: "Warm Up to Chavez"
Prior Years: 2006
The Shakeup Continues
ABC News is reporting that Zal Khalilzad, the current US Ambassador to Iraq, will be President Bush's nominee to be the US Ambassador to the UN. If confirmed, he'll replace John Bolton, who was named to that post via a recess appointment after Democrats filibustered a final vote on Bolton's nomination.
ABC News has learned that President Bush will nominate Zalmay Khalilzad to be the new U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Khalilzad is currently the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. The announcement may come as soon as tomorrow. Khalilzad's departure from Baghdad will happen as soon as he is confirmed as U.N. ambassador.I suspect that Democrats will use Khalilzad's confirmation hearing as an opportunity to carp about Bush policy but that he'll easily win confirmation once the bitching stops. Here's the other bit of news from the ABC article:
Ryan Crocker, currently the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, will be nominated to replace Khalilzad in Baghdad. Khalilzad has been U.S. ambassador to Iraq since June 2005. He is the highest ranking Muslim in the U.S. government and one of the few officials at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad fluent in Arabic.I suspect that Sen. Biden will enjoy playing such a prominent role early in the 110th Congress. That's because he thinks of himself as being a viable candidate for President. The sad truth is that he's much like John Kerry: He's a legend in his own mind. He's a good enough guy and he certainly isn't part of the 'Blame America for Everything' crowd but he simply is an airhead. He fancies himself a thinker but his original thinking brought forth the idea of dividing Iraq into three distinct regions to accommodate the Kurds in the north, the Sunnis in Central Iraq and the Shi'ites in southern Iraq. Most serious people listened politely, then went back to ignoring him.
Posted Friday, January 5, 2007 1:54 AM
No comments.
DFL Legislature's 'Legacy'
Anyone who's followed politics knows that Democrats love raising taxes. That the Democrat-controlled legislature proposed tax increases isn't news. That they opened the new session with an onslaught of taxes is news. Here's what the AP is reporting:
The proposals include:
- A transportation funding package would raise Minnesota's 20-cents-a-gallon gas tax by another dime. It would also increase license tab fees on newly purchased vehicles. And it would let all counties charge up to $20 annually for every car, what's known as a wheelage tax.
- A constitutional amendment bill would ask voters to raise the state sales tax by 3/8ths of a percent to pay for clean water, the arts and the outdoors. Another variation would boost the sales tax by a quarter of a percent for the outdoors and clean water.
- A children's health care bill would raise taxes on cigarettes by anywhere between $1 and $1.20 a pack, according to state Department of Revenue researchers. The tax on a tin of chewing tobacco would go up at least $2.24.
- Another bill would let school districts levy local property owners for the full cost of running ice arenas, instead of the current limit of 90 percent of the cost.
This puts the lie to this Mike Hatch statement:
Hatch gave his task an initial shot in a rambling acceptance speech that punched some of the right buttons. He cast Pawlenty as too stingy with education, responsible for large class sizes and rising college tuition. He tagged him for an inadequate response to soaring health care costs and the emerging biosciences industry. He promised more state investment in those things. Significantly, he said, "we can do this without raising taxes."At the time, I said that I agreed with Hatch that we could increase education spending without raising taxes. Here's what I said then:
That said, does anyone in their right mind think that Democrats won't raise taxes? I'll believe that the day I get photos of a leopard rearranging the spots on his fur. Believing that a Democrat won't raise taxes instinctively is like believing that making sudden movements towards a cobra won't get you bit.Thanks to the opening hours of this legislative session, I've been proven right. I'd be remiss to not include Larry Pogemiller's 'contribution' to this AP article:
Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller said it would be "improper" to conclude that Democrats are pushing tax increases. He said his caucus's top priority is to cut property taxes, and voters would decide whether to approve a constitutional amendment for a higher sales tax.Does Larry Pogemiller thinks that increasing the gas tax is a tax cut? Does he think that increasing the state sales tax is a tax cut? Does he think that increasing the cigarette tax is a tax cut? Does he think that increasing property tax levies is a tax cut?
"This is a tax cut," said Pogemiller, pointing to Senate File No. 1 on a list of bill introductions. "That's a tax cut. No. 1 is a tax cut." He added: "What matters is what the committees decide to do in terms of appropriate investments in Minnesota's future. We're done with the bullet points. We're going to do serious legislative work."
Awhile ago, Mr. Pogemiller said that Tarryl Clark would be the face of Senate Democrats & that he'd stay in the shadows. Instead, Pogemiller can't stay out of the spotlight even a single day. Instead, he's quoted as saying that the Democrats' tax increasing agenda is actually their tax cut agenda. Give me a break.
Mr. Pogemiller would've been better off had he kept his mouth shut.
Posted Friday, January 5, 2007 12:49 PM
No comments.
Democrats' Fast Track to Energy Independence?
Based on this article, it's apparent that Democrats put a higher priority on "The Environment" than on energy independence.
Opponents of oil drilling in an Alaskan wildlife refuge are going on the offense after playing defense for a quarter of a century. They want the new Democratic Congress to make an oft-challenged drilling ban permanent.This legislation would forever close the spigot on one of the U.S.'s biggest oil reserves while forcing us to import more oil from thugs like Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Then again, Massachusetts liberals like William Delahunt think nothing of making deals with thugs like Chavez.
Legislation introduced in the House on Friday would make the oil-rich 1.2 million-acre coastal strip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge a permanently protected wilderness and end repeated efforts to open the area east of the Prudhoe oil field to energy companies.
"The consensus is that there should not be drilling in the refuge, so the logical next step is to pass legislation which turns it into a wilderness," Rep. Edward Markey, chief sponsor of the legislation, said in an interview.
A subsidiary of the Venezuelan national oil company will ship 12 million gallons of discounted home-heating oil to local charities and 45,000 low-income families in Massachusetts next month under a deal arranged by US Representative William D. Delahunt, a local nonprofit energy corporation, and Venezuela's president, White House critic Hugo Chavez.Democrats obviously think that advancing an anti-American oil policy won't hurt them with the voters. With oil prices dropping, their gamble might pay off but it's a risk that they're willing to take because this is one of the issues they feel strongest about. This should tell everyone that Democrats' talk about energy independence is just that: talk. When given the opportunity to increase oil production, they choose to take more oil off-limits.
If that's their preferred method of limiting U.S. dependence on foreign oil, then it's a failed policy. Only a Democrat could think that limiting our domestic drilling options is a positive thing.
One last thing to remember is that every dollar spent buying Chavez's oil is a dollar he can spend on supporting terrorists.
Posted Saturday, January 6, 2007 9:16 AM
No comments.
Boxer Does the Right Thing
Anyone who has read my writings knows that I've been critical of Sen. Boxer numerous times. It's only fair that I congratulate her for doing the right thing. Here's the SacBee article that I'm referring to:
Last November, the head of the local chapter of a Muslim American civil rights group was honored by Sen. Barbara Boxer with a certificate "in recognition of (his) outstanding service."Joe Kaufman of Americans Against Hate issued an official statement, which read in part:
Basim Elkarra, the executive director of the Sacramento chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, was proud of the award, which he said reflected CAIR's bridge-building efforts with Christians, Jews, people of color and the FBI.
But Boxer, who said Wednesday that her staff made the award in her name without her knowledge, has rescinded it because of her "concerns" about CAIR, a national group based in Washington, D.C., that has been attacked by conservative Web sites for allegedly supporting terrorism.
As Executive Director r, Basim Elkarra has defended someone that trained for jihad in a Pakistani terrorist camp; he has defended an imam that urged a Pakistani crowd to wage attacks on America; and he has defended an imam that was attempting to build an Islamic school for the purpose of teaching children how to commit violent acts against Americans. As well, Elkarra has described Israel as a "racist" and "apartheid" state, and he has moderated an event that featured a Hamas operative who spent five years in an Israeli prison and who is currently on trial in the U.S.Most American citizens would think that Sen. Boxer did the right thing in rescinding the award. Parvez Ahmed, CAIR's National Chairman, isn't part of that group. He's upset with Sen. Boxer. Here's what he wrote on his blog about this incident:
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) recently rescinded an award to Basim Elkarra, the executive director of the Sacramento Valley chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).Calling Joe Kaufman "an anti-Muslim extremist" is laughable. In the interest of full disclosure, Joe invited me to contribute to his Americans Against Hate blog right after the midterm elections. Since then, I've had the good fortune to get to know Joe. What I've learned about Joe is that he's an expert in terrorist networks. Joe isn't a hate-filled bigot as Parvez Ahmed would have you believe. Quite the contrary, actually. Joe doesn't often deal in broad generalities. Instead, he focuses his energies on nailing down specifics about individuals or specific groups.
This disturbing news was met with a flurry of rhetorical high-fives by anti-Muslim extremists in the blogosphere. After Boxer's decision to rescind the award was made public, Elkarra received an e-mailed death threat. That threat is being investigated by the FBI.
But what led Sen. Boxer to rescind the award? The justifications offered range from the amazing to the bizarre.
According to Sen. Boxer's spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz, the senator became "concerned" after she read negative things about CAIR on a virulent anti-Muslim hate site. This despite the fact that the same website describes Sen. Boxer as someone who is "thickheaded" on national security and said, "The nation's dumbest Democrat, Barbara Boxer, has a plan to lose in Iraq."
It is truly disappointing to see Sen. Boxer use such a hate-filled and inflammatory site to form her opinions about CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group.
Just days before Sen. Boxer announced her decision, a demand for just such an action was issued by Joe Kaufman, an anti-Muslim extremist in Florida who has a long history of seeking to marginalize the Muslim community in that state.
Remember that bigots smear people with a broad brush. When you hear a statement that says "They're always like that" or "You can't trust those people", it's a telltale sign that the person quoted doesn't have specifics about the person or organization. One of the trademarks of Joe's writings is that he's very specific about quotes, people, dates and times.
I can understand CAIR's dislike for Joe. He's laid out proof that CAIR and other organizations have extensive ties to Islamic extremists. Joe simply lets the information lead him to his conclusions.
That's hardly the mark of a bigot.
It's also worth noting that CAIR doesn't offer specific proof to refute Joe's claims. Yes, they'll talk about the outreach that Elkarra has done. But they haven't said that Joe's initial claims aren't accurate. That's because they can't without getting exposed by terrorism experts like Joe, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer or Steve Emerson.
CAIR's name-calling is another telltale sign that they won't engage in serious debate. That isn't proof of holding the upper hand in a debate. Rather, it's proof that they're reduced to discrediting the source through innuendo and smears. It's the intellectual equivalent of an "Oh yeah"? or a "Says who"? during a debate.
Posted Saturday, January 6, 2007 9:54 AM
No comments.
Andy Aplikowski Gets Rodney Dangerfield 'Award'
I'm officially giving Andy Aplikowski the Rodney Dangerfield 'I Don't Get No Respect' Award based on Captain Ed's post here:
The first two hours features Power Line's John Hinderaker and Chad and Brian from Fraters Libertas. Mitch and I hit the airwaves for the second shift from 1-3 pm CT, and King Banaian and Michael Broadkorb have The Final Word from 3-5.Andy should believe that this was just a rare Captain Ed oversight, not part of an orchestrated conspiracy effort by Ron Carey.
Posted Saturday, January 6, 2007 11:43 AM
No comments.
Pull Their Licenses
That's my recommendation to the officials at Minneapolis-St. Paul International airport that have jurisdiction over who gets taxi licenses & who doesn't. Here's what the AP is reporting:
Officials at Minneapolis-St. Paul International airport are proposing stiffer penalties, including suspension of an airport taxi license, to Muslim cab drivers who refuse service to passengers toting alcohol or service dogs.Taxi drivers can't pick & choose which fares they'll pick up & which ones they won't. That's discrimination. The commission sets the work rules because it needs order. What type of chaos would result if Muslim taxi drivers were allowed to not pick up people "toting alcohol or service dogs"?
Officials on Wednesday asked the Metropolitan Airport Commission for permission to hold public hearings on a proposal that would suspend the airport licenses of cab drivers who refuse service for reasons other than safety concerns. The penalties would also apply to drivers who refuse a fare because a trip is too short.
Drivers would have their airport licenses suspended 30 days for the first offense and revoked for two years after the second offense, according to the proposal.
That's why I'm encouraging the Metropolitan Airport Commission to tell these taxi drivers that they must play by the rules or they can find other areas to ply their trade. If they choose to work somewhere, then they must abide by the rules established by that regulatory commission.
Driving a taxi is a service industry. In service industries, the customer is always right within reason. Transporting "alcohol or service dogs" isn't unreasonable. If that offends the drivers, then they either need to move to another industry or another location. There's a bigger point here, too. Should Muslims have the right to refuse service to people who want to transport "alcohol" elsewhere in the Twin Cities?
Follow this link to get the MAC's contact information. I strongly encourage my readers to let the MAC know that you stand with them on this important issue.
Airports Commissioner Bert McKasy said the issue raised by Muslim cab drivers who say that carrying alcohol or dogs, including those that help people with disabilities, violates religious beliefs is "unfortunate." "I think it's pretty much the consensus of the commissioners and the staff that we have to provide good service to the public, and that's pretty much the bottom line," McKasy said.Expect this issue to get a hearing with the House Judiciary Committee. It isn't a reach to think that John Conyers, CAIR-Michigan's Man of the Year in 2005, wouldn't love to include this in his efforts to give Muslims special special civil-rights protections. In fact, I'll predict that we should expect alot of this type of legislation in the 110th Congress, especially with Nancy Pelosi and John Conyers being such staunch allies of CAIR and like-minded organizations.
Originally posted Saturday, January 6, 2007, revised 07-Jan 12:21 AM
No comments.
A Gracious Op-ed
With all the partisanship that we've seen from Democrats this week, I think it's appropriate to talk about Chevy Chase's op-ed in the NY Times. Here's my favorite section of Mr. Chase's op-ed:
Seated at a small table set for four in a simple dining room also containing a somewhat complicated videotape recorder and TV set were the former commander in chief and I making friendly small talk before lunch was brought in. And on all fours, literally on their hands and knees in front of the bulky and confusing tape machine, were Mrs. Ford and Jayni trying their best to figure out the wiring of the playback machine and the way the whole system worked, so we could watch the screen tests. Noting the effort the ladies were putting into getting the VCR to work, I suggested to Mr. Ford that perhaps we might help them out.It's nice that Chase wrote this. He made a name for himself lampooning President Ford. And he is a megaliberal. He hates President Bush to the core.
As I began to stand up from my chair, he took gentle hold of my arm, sat me back down and said: "No, no, Chevy. Don't even think about it. I'll probably get electrocuted, and you'll be picked up and arrested for murder."
We both laughed.
I'll never forget that moment. My laughter was hearty and genuine.
Posted Saturday, January 6, 2007 10:59 PM
No comments.
Israel Preparing Nuke Attack on Natanz
That's what this article claims. I don't put alot of credibility into it, though. Here's why:
Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear "bunker-busters", according to several Israeli military sources.If we should've learned anything the past couple years, it's that leakers shouldn't be trusted. That isn't saying that these sources aren't right; it's just that we've seen alot of leakers who leaked to discredit plans or to try and give their agenda a boost. People with agendas and who hide behind a cloud of secrecy aren't my idea of a stand up person.
There is one thing that's worth contemplating in all this: Israel's intelligence is among the most reliable in the world. Whether they're planning on using low-yield bunker-busters or not, they obviously think that Iran is near to developing nuclear weapons capability.
That alone should give serious people pause.
Posted Sunday, January 7, 2007 2:38 AM
No comments.
Joe Kennedy: "Warm Up to Chavez"
Yes, you read that right. Joe Kennedy II has written an op-ed in today's NY Daily News where he attempts to rationalize the deal made with Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez. Here's how he attempts to justify doing business with the Western Hemisphere's biggest terrorist supporter:
When the oil industry profits hit a record annual high of more than $100 billion, we wrote every OPEC nation asking for some assistance to alleviate the huge burden of energy prices on the poor. We wrote to every single major oil company as well.Joe Kennedy is missing the point by making this rationalization. The same week that he writes an op-ed explaining why we need to make deals with the most notorious South American thug, we also learned that the Democratic House wants to take ANWR off-limits forever. The bill's author is Ed Markey, (D-MA). ANWR has one of the biggest natural gas fields in the world.
And every single one turned us down.
Every one, that is, except Venezuela and CITGO Petroleum.
So, in 2005, we began a partnership with CITGO, an oil company owned by the people and the government of Venezuela , to distribute heating oil. The program went smoothly. Tens of thousands of households were served without any particular controversy.
This year was another story. Our program attracted negative attention this season for only one reason: Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's controversial speech at the United Nations last September. A lot of people didn't like Chavez's speech. I didn't like his remarks, either.
That speech led critics to suggest that the oil program to help the needy is somehow un-American.
How is aiding those less fortunate un-American? It is only un-American to hypocrites who criticize a program that helps the poor, but are perfectly happy to drive their cars, fill their boats, fly their planes and heat their homes using Venezuelan oil. If the oil isn't good enough for the poor, it shouldn't be good enough for them.
Let's frame this issue a different way: Joe Kennedy thinks that we should buy heating oil from a thug who is Iran's best friend rather than touch the pristine beauty of ANWR. The only bad part is that the section of ANWR where the drilling would happen is neither pristine nor beautiful, though it is wilderness.
What makes this worse is that this deal gives Venezuela a substantial injection of cash, cash that it can now use to prop up Iran's failing economy right when we're trying to squeeze Iran with sanctions.
It's rather disgusting that Kennedy would play this type of game, saying that they were just interested in helping the poor. Shame on him for that. If they weren't so opposed to drilling in a section of land that's seen only a handful of visitors other than the oilmen that drill there, we could have abundant natural gas at a cheap price without having to deal with thug dictators like Chavez.
What it really comes down to is that Kennedy's fine with dealing with a tyrant but he's vehemently opposed to giving American oil companies the tools they need to maintain a steady supply of oil for the poor that Kennedy's so worried about. We wouldn't have these problems if Kennedy's environmental extremist allies weren't so bent on preserving wilderness as they were with supplying everyone's basic needs.
Unfortunately for the average working person, these environmental extremists worship at the altar of Mother Nature while making deals with the devil instead of looking out for the average working stiff.
It's also disingenuous for Kennedy to say that CITGO is owned "by the people and the Venezuelan government." Venezuela is a socialist state, meaning that the government gets first dibs on revenue while giving to the rest of the country a pittance after the government has lined their pockets.
Now, thanks to CITGO, more than 100,000 New Yorkers will not be ignored this season, and 25 million gallons of low-cost heating oil will help them stay a little warmer.All this rationalizing wouldn't be needed if Democrats didn't make public lands off-limits for drilling. This is typical liberalism. They create a crisis because they're beholden to extremist groups like the environmental extremists, then 'solve' the crisis they created by making deals with tyrants and dictators.
This assistance comes at a time when our government has cut the federal fuel assistance budget by a third and resisted collecting royalties from oil companies making huge profits from drilling on public land, funds that should be used, along with windfall tax revenues from energy companies, to offset the burden of higher energy prices on the poor.
Frankly, I don't know how much more of this type of 'help' America can afford.
Posted Sunday, January 7, 2007 9:58 PM
No comments.
