March 8, 2007
Mar 08 02:13 A Jury of His Peers? Part II Mar 08 10:05 Washington Quote of the Day Mar 08 13:28 Rep. Brod Introduces Grieving Parents Act Mar 08 15:53 Everything You Wanted to Know About Democrats' Tax Increases Mar 08 16:28 The Surge Is Working!!! Mar 08 21:48 Citizen Compass Survey Released Mar 08 22:31 Dean Johnson, the Joe Wilson of Minnesota Politics Mar 08 23:38 Pelosi to America: We Aren't Losing Fast Enough
Prior Years: 2006
A Jury of His Peers? Part II
Yesterday, I wrote about how the jury foreman, Denis Collins, worked at the Washington Post with Bob Woodward. I said that Mr. Collins was good friends with Woodward and Tim Russert. This transcript of Rush's opening monologue offers more detail than I gave yesterday. Here's what it says:
[RUSH:] I want to start with this juror, Denis Collins. It turns out that in the jury selection phase before Denis Collins' name came out, he was identified as having worked with Bob Woodward. He was identified as being a neighbor of Tim Russert. Both would later testify in the case. So this juror, who I have no doubt took over the jury room and ran this whole show, lived near Russert, worked with Woodward and at the Washington Post, and said last night on Larry King Live he plans to write about this.If that doesn't sound like Scooter Libby was up against a stacked deck to you, then you'd best think it through about what constitutes a stacked deck. Those jurors sound like they started with the feeling that somebody from the Bush administration had to pay for Bush taking the country to war in Iraq.
I'll bet he took copious notes in there. And of course if you're planning on writing about something it's far better to write about a conviction than if you have to right about an acquittal. What's sexy about writing about an acquittal here when you are a Democrat, a registered Democrat, as this juror was? People are saying, "How did he end up on the jury?" I asked that question myself to people last night who were able to answer it. The people close to the Libby defense trust, people that were raising money for his defense fund, said, "You would not have believed this jury pool. We had MoveOn.org people in the jury pool. We had as many leftists as you could think of, and we used up our strikes. By the time they got to this guy we had no strikes left, no peremptory challenges left, and we ended up being stuck with him." He was on Larry King Live last night, and Larry said, "Denis Collins, you going to write about this?"
COLLINS: I am going to write about it. I'm not quite sure what the format or where it will be.
[RUSH:] Like I told you yesterday, the unearthly difference that differing groups of people can have about a singular truth, the singular truth that Joe Wilson is not credible, that Joe Wilson is an out-and-out, confirmed liar. The Senate intelligence committee, no less, said so about him.Let's hope that the appeals court rules that Judge Walton's ruling not allowing the defense to impeach Mr. Russert's testimony violated Libby's due process rights. I don't know if that's enough to toss this verdict out and mandate a retrial but I'd have to think that it can't be taken lightly.
The Washington Post said so today in an editorial. Yet the liars are getting rich and getting famous, and Tim Russert has convicted Scooter Libby. Tim Russert, who said yesterday, "I take no joy in this," was the same Tim Russert who said when the indictment came down, "We felt like it was Christmas morning." The defense was not allowed to skewer Russert to try to damage some of his credibility.
One of the things that Russert had said was that he did not, he has a law degree, know that the grand jury testimony, people that were summoned to testify before grand juries, were not allowed to bring lawyers in there when in fact the defense had tape of Russert saying just the opposite on Meet the Press and on other television shows three other times. They were not allowed to introduce that, which will be one of the things that, no doubt, will be on appeal.
As Rush said, this verdict should get conservatives' dander up. This should be a great motivating factor in getting out and winning people over to vote Republican in 2008. It's time that we fought these people with the intensity that they've been fighting us with.
That brings me to another point that needs to be made. Republicans talk about Democrats as operating with a pre-9/11 mindset, which is true. What we haven't talked about is that Republicans operate from a pre-Watergate mindset. What I mean by that is that Republicans operate with the naivete that the press will give them a fair shake. The post-Watergate press thinks that there's a life-changing scandal behind every interview.
It's time that Republicans talked to as many different groups about how the Agenda Media's bias is affecting their lives. I suspect that most people's eyes glaze over when they hear the term media bias. I further suspect that that would change if we started showing examples of how the Agenda Media's bias is hurting our country and endangering our people. Republicans should take every opportunity to tell people that this is personal, that the Agenda Media think nothing of destroying people as long as the Agenda Media thinks that it serves 'the greater good'.
It's time that we told people all the things that the Agenda Media don't report on. I'd bet that if we listed all the things that the Agenda Media went silent on, people would be shocked into anger. Right now, I think people are apathetic about the media because they'd rather believe that we live in a country where injustice is the exception rather than the rule. If we showed people all the things that get omitted from articles, I suspect that their beliefs would change dramatically.
That's our only hope.
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 2:13 AM
No comments.
Washington Quote of the Day
God bless Rep. Steve Israel for giving us today's Washington Quote of the Day. In an article about the Democrats' meeting unveiling their new plan on Iraq, Rep. Israel is quoted as saying:
"It's much easier to express an opinion to a pollster than it is to formulate effective policy on something as intractable as Iraq," Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) said.Actually, Rep. Israel, it isn't that difficult if the goal is to defeat the jihadists and stabilize the Iraqi government. The thing that makes this a difficult venture for Democrats is that they've gotten away with simply being opposed to anything that President Bush said. Now they're having to actually use their brains to govern, something that's obviously foreign to them.
The good news for the Maliki government is that the Democrats are so divided on this that they won't cut off funding for fear of an electoral defeat in 2008. They love the Loony Left's campaign contributions and their energy but they also know that following their lead will lead to electoral defeat
This decision would get easier if they read the headlines from Baghdad:
The government information campaign and the news about thousands of additional troops coming had a positive impact even before the operation started. Commanders and lieutenants of various militant groups abandoned their positions in Baghdad and in some cases fled the country. Diyala province, to the east of Baghdad, was the destination for many Sunni extremists, while Shiite militiamen went to Babil and Diwaniya in the south. Some higher-ranking members of Shiite and Sunni militant groups fled to Iran and Syria respectively. This migration motivated the government to announce supporting security measures in five provinces around Baghdad, to make sure that fleeing bad guys do not regroup in other cities.Here's more reason for optimism for Operation Imposing Law:
The Iraqi commanders are also trying to give the operation a national stamp by including troops from across the country; even from Kurdistan and far provinces like Basra, where politicians and officers have been long opposed to being involved in Baghdad. Yet another aspect that makes "Imposing Law" unique is its ascending intensity. Unlike other operations that always started from a peak and soon lost momentum, this plan is becoming stricter and gaining momentum by the day as more troops pour into the city, allowing for a better implementation of the "clear and hold" strategy. People here always want the "hold" part to materialize, and feel safe when they go out and find the Army and police maintaining their posts; the bad guys can't intimidate as long as the troops are staying.Here's what Fred Barnes said on last night's roundtable about Operation Imposing Law:
BARNES: Bob Gates. It is what Brian Williams said, of NBC. You know, there're not a lot of reporters who have been over there and then gone back and gone to the same places and looked around, and Brian Williams said two things. One, it is better. Things are better in Baghdad. The surge appears to be off to a good start. Mad Secondly, he said that something that Democrats refused to admit and that is that it is a new strategy. It's different, what the troops are doing.That's spot-on analysis from Fred Barnes, something that I've come to expect from him. What Fred's essentially saying is that facts on the ground are changing, something that I talked about yesterday.
HUME: Yeah, it isn't just an addition of troops, it's more than the injection of troops.
BARNES: Yeah, that there's a new strategy. And of course, Nancy Pelosi and all the Democrats pretend like, well, this is just more of the same. Well, there are more troops, but it is not the same strategy. And that, of course, is the reason why it`s beginning to work.
Look, Brian Williams has no reason to say this if is not true. Bob Gates does have a reason to say that things are getting better, he works for the Bush administration, they want to say that. But, Brian Williams is no tool of the Bush administration.
If Democrats were smart, they'd get out of the way of this new strategy and let it work. That said, Democrats aren't smart. They won't get out of the way and give war a chance. That's why they'll get hurt in the next election.
"There's a fine line that I hope will not be blurred between micromanaging the war and assuring accountability," said Rep. Stephanie Herseth (SD), a Blue Dog leader. "I don't think we should be overreacting to public opinion polls."For some reason, the old song "Torn Between Two Lovers" comes to mind. I think that Rep. Herseth would like to vote to defund the war but realizes that she'd get creamed if she stopped triangulating.
But antiwar liberals find such temporizing infuriating, seeing the Democratic win in November's midterm elections as a clear mandate to end the war.
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 10:06 AM
No comments.
Rep. Brod Introduces Grieving Parents Act
The Pi-Press's Rachel Stassen-Berger has a good article about Rep. Laura Brod's legislation. Here's a description of the legislation:
The bill is less than a page long, but supporters say it would offer grieving parents a world of relief. They've dubbed it the Grieving Parents Act. Current law requires hospitals and other medical providers to cremate or bury fetal remains, but many parents don't know they can make choices about that, Brod said. The measure would require medical providers to tell women about their choices and release fetal remains to parents, just as they release other human remains.This is the perfect picture of how Republican-proposed legislation improves peoples' lives. The legislation is wholly contained on a single sheet of paper; it's narrowly focused & it helps inform people so they can make their own informed decisions.
In other words, what's not to love about this legislation?
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 1:28 PM
No comments.
Everything You Wanted to Know About Democrats' Tax Increases
Someone just emailed me a comprehensive list of the Democrats' tax increases. Here's that list:
Democrats Propose Billions In Tax HikesRemember that Cy Thao caucuses with the Democrats & that he's got the chutzpah to say "When you guys win, you get to keep your money. When we win, we take your money." With that type of attitude, it shouldn't be a surprise that Democrats think that they have first claim on your salary?
Last year, the Democrats said nothing about raising taxes. They seemed to agree that a billion dollars of new taxes and spending would be enough for 2007. But look at what they are proposing now:
INCOME TAXES ON WORKING MINNESOTANS
Rep. Mindy Greiling (D-Roseville) wants to raise income taxes by $252 million.
Rep. Ann Lenczewski (D-Bloomington) wants to raise income taxes on 170,000 taxpayers. She added this tax increase with an amendment to H.F. 1258. It would collect millions more in income taxes.
SALES TAXES ON CONSUMERS
Rep. Melissa Hortman (D-Brooklyn Park) wants to impose an extra sales tax to pay for transit and other purposes. In the Metro area, there would be one tax increase. In the rest of the state, the new tax could be proposed by any two or more county boards. (H.F. 1463)
Rep. Rick Hansen (D-South St. Paul) would impose an extra sales tax to raise at least $500 million a year pay for new parks, trails, and habitat projects. (H.F. 1449)
Rep. Shelley Madore (D-Apple Valley) wants to impose an extra sales tax on the three million people in the metro area to pay for more buses and trolleys. (H.F. 1112).
TAXING THE DEAD, THE DRIVERS, AND THE HOMEOWNERS
Rep. Tom Anzelc (D-International Falls) wants to authorize a new tax on dead people in his area to pay for the Lakeview Cemetery Association. (H.F. 213).
Rep. Bernie Lieder (D-Crookston) wants to triple a tax on hearses. (H.F. 946)
Rep. Ken Tschumper (D-La Crescent) wants to raise fuel taxes by 50 percent on gasoline, E85, M85, liquefied petroleum gas, propane, liquefied natural gas, and compressed natural gas. (H.F. 1469).
Rep. Bernie Lieder (D-Crookston) wants to raise your gas taxes by 50 percent, and allow counties to charge you a wheelage tax, and triple the tax on cars and hearses, and allow counties to raise the sales tax, and put a transportation-impact tax on every building permit, and raise the cost to register vehicles. (H.F. 946)
Homeowners would face a 50 percent increase when filing any papers related to the purchase, transfer, mortgaging, sale, or other transfer of property. Money from those taxes on homeowners would be given to non-homeowners seeking to rent property or buy their own homes. Rep. Scott Kranz (D-Blaine) wrote H.F. 939.
Rep. Melissa Hortman (D-Brooklyn Park) wants to collect more taxes on local deeds and mortgage documents in Anoka County. (H.F. 362)
Rep. Erin Murphy (D-St. Paul) wants to collect more taxes on local deeds and mortgage documents in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties. (H.F. 1042)
Rep. Joe Atkins (D-Inver Grove Heights) wants to collect more taxes on local deeds and mortgage documents in Dakota County. (H.F. 1466)
TAXING ALCOHOL AND COSMETIC SURGERY
The Democrats are trying to raise taxes on alcohol and cosmetic surgery.
Rep. Phyllis Kahn (D-Minneapolis) wants to tax cosmetic surgery. This would be a bad precedent the sales tax, which generally has applied only to goods (except for food, clothing, and a few other exceptions). (H.F. 1027)
Rep. Michael Paymar (D-St. Paul) wants to pile enormous tax increases on beverages containing alcohol. He would raise taxes on metric sales beverages by the following percentages: distilled spirits (up 228%); wine (up 450%); hard cider (up 800%); regular beer (up 790%); and 3.2% beer (up 457%). (H.F. 1050) It would collect over $110 million in new taxes.
Rep. Karen Clark (D-Minneapolis) is seeking similar increases in taxes on alcohol, but for other purposes. (H.F. 1446)
TAXES ON DOTING FRIENDS AND RELATIVES
Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wants to put a 10% tax on people who give gifts. If the donor does not pay the tax, then the tax liability shifts to the person who received the gift. In such cases, the donor would still be liable for a $100 penalty for not paying the gift tax. Under the bill, you could be required to show the gift to the Commissioner of Revenue to determine its true worth. (H.F. 1212)
TAXES THAT WILL DESTROY JOBS AND CHASE AWAY EMPLOYERS
You have seen the television ads for Pacific Mutual Insurance, with whales swimming through the air, and splashing their tails in the rolling waves.
California decided to cut back on deductions that local companies took for business expenses they incurred in other states. So the whales moved to the cornfields when Pacific Mutual decided to move its headquarters to Nebraska.
A similar fate could await major Minnesota employers if the same types of tax burdens are piled on them by Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis). He wants to punish "foreign operating corporations," which are major local employers whose success has allowed them to do business in other states and countries. (H.F. 943)
"REACH OUT AND TOUCH SOMEONE," WITH TAXES
Rep. Debra Hilstrom (D-Brooklyn Center) wants to raise a tax on cell phones, land-line phones, and other telecommunications devices by 46%. (H.F. 1464)
"GIVING" BEGINS AT HOME
Rep. Frank Moe (D-Bemidji) wants to raise local sales and use taxes in Bemidji. (H.F. 1103)
Rep. Will Morgan (D-Burnsville) wants to create special tax increment financing districts in Burnsville. These districts often shift property tax burdens onto current landowners for years. (H.F. 1054)
Rep. Terry Morrow (D-St. Peter) wants a new local sales tax authorized for North Mankato. (H.F. 108)
Rep. Bill Hilty (D-Finlayson) wants a new local sales tax authorized for Cloquet. (H.F. 885)
Rep. Mike Jaros (D-Duluth) to raise taxes on food and beverages in Duluth to help to pay for a new hockey arena in that city. (H.F. 134)
FEE INCREASES AHEAD
Democrats campaigned against fee increases last fall. But now, they are introducing bills with lots of fees. Some of the tax increases described above are called "fee increases" in part or in whole (phone fees, alcohol fees, health impact fees). Then there are these bills:
Rep. Larry Haws (D-St. Cloud) wants to raise fees for county and regional jails. (H.F. 161)
Rep. Brita Sailer (D-Park Rapids) wants to raise fees on video and electronic equipment sales. (H.F. 854)
Rep. Joe Atkins (D-Inver Grove Heights) wants to impose an extra $250 fee on cigarette manufacturers. (H.F. 1737)
Rep. Erin Murphy (D-St. Paul) wants to raise pharmacy fees automatically on an annual basis. (H.F. 1722)
After reading this list of tax increase proposals, shouldn't you be seeing red?
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 3:55 PM
No comments.
The Surge Is Working!!!
That doesn't come as surprise to anyone who's been following the news accounts from Baghdad. That said, it's obvious that more reports are surfacing that tell the same story. Here's one such article.
In the week of Feb. 24 to March 2, officials said, insurgency strikes and suicide bombings dropped for the fourth consecutive week in Baghdad. They linked this to the steady increase of security patrols in the city.Earlier today, I posted a quote from Fred Barnes during last night's roundtable discussion where Fred said that Nancy Pelosi won't admit it but Brian Williams has reported that there's been a change in strategy in Baghdad. I said awhile ago that President Bush's 'Come to Jesus' meeting with Maliki, where President Bush said that there wouldn't be political cover given to people like Muqtada al-Sadr, was a major turning point in securing Baghdad. These statistics bear that opinion out. Here's more positive information on what's happening in Baghdad:
The army said violence has decreased by 80 percent in the most insurgency-ridden areas of Baghdad. Officials said Shi'ite and Sunni insurgents have been overwhelmed by the current joint Iraqi-U.S. operation in the Iraqi capital.
Brig. Gen. John Campbell, deputy commander of Multi-National Division-Baghdad, told a briefing on March 6 that 19 people were killed in insurgency strikes in Baghdad in February 2007. Campbell said 254 were slain in the city in December 2006.A drop from 254 civilians killed in December to 19 in February is a dramatic improvement. In fact, I'd say that dramatic is understatement. It gets better:
Campbell said Iraqi and U.S. forces have been raiding insurgency strongholds and capturing weapons caches. He said that from Feb. 24 to March 2, the forces seized 74 weapon caches. This exceeded the previous week's total by 11.You can't maintain an insurgency if you've had your ammunition supply depleted to that level. Based on this information, I'd say that the insurgents are running out of ammunition. This shortage has diminished the insurgents' capability to inflict violence on citizens.
All of this good news must be disconcerting to the team of Pelosi, Murtha, Levin and other left wing pacifists. If this continues, opinions of the war will change and they'll be swimming upstream against a strong current for 2008. That's something the 'Party That Owns Defeat' can't tolerate if they hope to have any electoral success. Their presidential candidates have moved so far left on this issue that they'd be riddled with questions of why they lost confidence in the military's ability to complete their mission.
Rest assured that this information is giving Democrat strategists heartburn, if not ulcers. Let's hope that this type of positive information keeps coming another six months. If it does, then Democrats will be in a precarious position for 2008.
I can't think of a group that's earned that position more.
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 4:29 PM
No comments.
Citizen Compass Survey Released
If ever there was a document that shows how out of touch the average DFL legislator is with the rank & file DFLer, it's the Citizen Compass poll just released minutes ago. Here's some of the poll questions & the results to those questions:
1. Minnesotans continue to be optimistic about the direction of the state.This information shouldn't be a comfort to Democrats since they're attempting to push a radicalized budget, including outrageous tax increases.
By a 59-38% margin, residents believe the state is headed in the right direction, rather than off on the wrong track. This finding is consistent with other Minnesota polling data from the past 24-30 months. A majority of nearly every demographic group is optimistic about the state's direction, with the most optimism found among Republicans, engaged citizens and those with incomes above $75,000.
2. Minnesotans continue to be concerned about their state and local tax burden.Democrats will ignore these findings but they'll imperil themselves when they do. As this clearly shows, a majority of Minnesotans think that they're overtaxed & that the overwhelming majority identify property taxes as the taxes that have grown the most out of control. The Democrats haven't accomplished any of their priorities thus far. If they fail to provide the proper property tax relief, they'll be run out of their House majority in 2008.
In this survey, 54% percent of Minnesotans stated that the state's tax burden is too high , 42% believe it is just right and 2% believe the state's tax burden is too low. Meanwhile, 47% percent of Minnesotans report taxes and fees are growing faster than their income , 36% report their taxes and fees are growing (but not as fast as their income) while 9% reported taxes are going down compared to their income. Of those who reported their tax burden is increasing, 84% identify property taxes as the leading cause of those increases.
3. Minnesotans continue to support solving the past state budget deficits without raising taxes.This should be called the Mindy Greiling Warning shot across the bow because she's proposed raising taxes while the state enjoys the second-biggest surplus in state history. If taxpayers supported not raising taxes when we had the biggest deficit in state history, they certainly won't support raising taxes when we've got a surplus.
By a margin of 70-28%, Minnesotans agree that the Governor and Legislature were right to try to avoid general tax increases while dealing with the budget deficit. This support cuts across party lines; for instance, a majority of self-identified Democrats (59-39%) and Liberals (55-44%) continue to support this approach to solving the recent state budget deficit. Of the 28% who disagree with this approach, less than half say important state programs were cut as a result of not raising taxes.
You'll notice that the polling shows that even Democrats oppose Greiling's income tax increase. I suspect that Democrats will push Greiling's legislation to the side.
Live within your means:Frankly, there isn't much in the way of good news for Democrats in this poll. If Democrats insist on telling us that a $2.16 billion surplus doesn't really exist; if they insist that tax increases are needed to 'properly fund' education, they'll get blasted in the 2008 elections.
We pay enough in taxes. 59% of Minnesotans agree that state government should live within its means , while only 41% stated tax increases are needed to maintain a high quality of life. When asked whether Minnesota's price of government is high enough, a strong majority (82%) believe paying 16 cents in taxes for every dollar earned is enough to fund state and local government, with only 14% of residents stating they can afford to pay more taxes.
Spend the money better.Based on this poll question, if a teacher were to grade the legislature on how they're doing in terms of fiscal sanity, they'd get an F- only because there isn't a lower grade available. What's got to hurt the most to Democrats is that 5 out of 6 people think that "some business principles should be applied to government." That's the last standard Democrats want applied to their budgeting process.
When asked about the job the Minnesota Legislature is doing, 75% of Minnesotans state the Legislature needs to do a better job of spending the money they already have , while only 23% state the Legislature does a good job of spending tax dollars. In addition, 83% of Minnesotans believe some business principles should be applied to government , while only 12% believe that we shouldn't expect government to budget and operate the way a business does.
Check back tomorrow when I'll publish all of the poll questions & results.
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 9:51 PM
No comments.
Dean Johnson, the Joe Wilson of Minnesota Politics
When last I wrote about former Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson, he'd gotten defeated in a year when Democrats seemed invincible. When I last wrote about him, an ethics cloud hung over his head. (UPDATE: That cloud is still hovering overhead.) Tonight, though, the DFL said that Dean Johnson belonged on the U of M Board of Regents despite the ethical baggage he'll carry with him to his grave.
At a secretly taped meeting of clergy members in New London in January: "Members of the Supreme Court, I know all of them. I have had a number of visits with them about our law. All of them, every one of them, including the lady who just stepped down, Kathleen Blatz,You know what her response was? 'Dean, we all stand for election, too, every six years.' She said, 'We are not going to touch it.' That's what she said to me. I've talked with Justice Anderson, and another Justice Anderson. Dean, we're not going to do it.'"As you can see by those statements, Dean Johnson is the Minnesota equivalent of Joe Wilson. Just like with Wilson, the easiest way to tell if Johnson is lying is if his lips are moving. Dean Johnson should be treated like radioactive waste by the DFL. Instead, they applauded him after voting him into this position of power. Minnesotans of all political stripes should call for Johnson's immediate resignation.
In a statement March 15: "I have at no time ever received any promises or commitments regarding any potential judicial cases from any member of the state Supreme Court."
In an interview with Minnesota Public Radio on March 16: "I asked one of the judges, 'What do you think about the Minnesota law regarding same-sex marriage, put in place in 1997?' The justice thought about it, said, 'I think the law is pretty good and probably something we're not going to take a look at.' And you know, kind of as a matter of fact, said, 'You know, we stand for election too.'"
In a news conference March 17: "After a discussion about the wind and weather and relatives and the Legislature, I simply said, 'Any thoughts on the '97 DOMA law?' And the person shrugged their shoulders and said, 'Yeah, we have a law.' That was it."
In a Senate floor speech March 27: "I apologize to you for the inaccurate statement which I made in a meeting with pastors in January,I regret the statement I made."
In an interview Tuesday: "My story has been the same all along."
Democrats sounded the theme of diversity early & often tonight. Sen. Johnson represents a new type of diversity: No U of M regent had ever been appointed with such ethical baggage as Johnson's carrying. That isn't most Minnesotans' idea of diversity.
Democrats have the votes to push these sorts of thing through. If they want to think only about this legislative session, then they'd better be prepared to hear commercials reminding Minnesotans that they voted this ethically stained man into such a high profile position. Rest assured that MOBsters will remind voters that the DFL leadership puts little priority on ethical behavior. We'll remind them that they value cronyism more than integrity. The SCBA will remind St. Cloud residents that Larry Haws voted for Johnson.
We'll remind them that the DFL simply doesn't share most Minnesotans' values. If they did, they wouldn't have voted in this charlatan.
Originally posted Thursday, March 8, 2007, revised 11-Mar 7:10 PM
No comments.
Pelosi to America: We Aren't Losing Fast Enough
According to this Politico article, Democrats don't think we're unilaterally surrendering fast enough. Here's how they spin their policy:
The House Democratic plan for funding the war in Iraq could force a pullout of U.S. combat troops starting on July 1, with all American units out of the country by the end of 2007, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters Thursday. Even under the least aggressive timetable laid out by Pelosi and other Democratic leaders, U.S. forces will have withdrawn from Iraq by Sept. 1, 2008.The House legislation is DOA in the Senate. This legislation is pure posturing based on several things. First, Senate Republicans will filibuster a restriction-laden bill. Secondly, the conference report will strip out the defeatist House/Murtha/Pelosi language. I won't even throw in the throwaway line that "If it makes it to President Bush's desk, he'll veto it" because it won't get nearly that far.
When the pullout begins depends on the progress that the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki makes in meeting political and military benchmarks. President Bush would have to certify by July 1 that the Maliki government is "making progress" toward those goals, or a U.S. withdrawal would start immediately and be finished in six months.
The speaker also dismissed a potential veto by Bush, or the likelihood that the bill would get bogged down in the Senate, as immaterial to what she and House Democrats were trying to do. Pelosi said worrying about whether Bush would sign a bill was "too limiting" for House Democrats. Pelosi told reporters that the goal of the Democratic proposal, included within a $95 billion wartime spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan, is to bring about an end to the war, "safely, reasonably and soon."Pelosi is so out of touch with flyover country voters that it's scary. She doesn't blink an eyelash at admitting that they don't care about winning, that their biggest priority is in appeasing their Nutroots base.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey (D-WI) said Democrats are seeking to bring the Iraq conflict to "an orderly and responsible close" so that the United States could refocus attention on the "forgotten war" in Afghanistan.Rep. Obey's stated goal is to put a higher priority on killing terrorists in Afghanistan than on killing terrorists in Iraq. I wonder If Rep. Obey could explain why Democrats are putting a higher priority on killing Afghan-based terrorists than on killing Iraq-based terrorists and insurgents. Does Rep. Obey know something we don't? Does Rep. Obey know that Afghan-based terrorists are more likely to attack the United States than are the Iranian-supplied terrorists in Iraq?
I doubt that Rep. Obey thinks any of those things. I suspect that it's the best spin he can put on rationalizing unilateral surrender without calling it unilateral surrender.
Democrats also want to prohibit the creation of permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq, ban torture and limit the time of deployment to Iraq for combat troops while ensuring that no units deployed there lack proper equipment, training or rest.Why do Democrats want to "prohibit the creation of permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq"? You'd think that having a couple bases in western Iraq would be a positive thing because so much of our foreign threats are based in the region. Having a base, especially an Air Force base, could be used to keep the pressure on the Iranians.
Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA), chairman on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, had earlier talked about inserting language in the Iraq bill to close the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but that language is not in the bill.Most of the things that Murtha bragged about have been shot down by the DFL caucus because they know that passing legislation with his restrictions would be political suicide in 2008.
Posted Thursday, March 8, 2007 11:40 PM
No comments.
