May 26-28, 2007
May 26 00:43 Terrorists' Civil Rights Act Advances May 26 08:24 (Do Nothing) Politics As Usual? May 26 12:57 You've Gotta Love This Guy's Philosophy May 27 07:58 That Was Wrong May 27 12:40 The Murtha Democrats May 28 01:05 Swails Anticipating Tough Campaigning? May 28 01:28 Must Reading!!! May 28 09:52 What We Got Here Is a Failure to Communicate May 28 21:33 Jihad Through Litigation
Prior Years: 2006
Terrorists' Civil Rights Act Advances
The Senate Armed Services Committee approved a bill that would give terrorists access to lawyers this week, making it the first terrorist civil rights act in US history. Here's the details of what's contained in the bill:
Senate Democrats are backing a bill that would grant new rights to terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, including access to a lawyer regardless of whether the prisoners are put on trial.About a year ago, I participated in a study of who's still being held at Gitmo. Suffice it to say that they're the nastiest of the nastiest. For the Senate Armed Services Committee to pass legislation that gives them access to lawyers is absurd and insulting. They don't deserve that type of protection. What they do deserve is to be given three meals a day and a place to sleep. Anything beyond that is giving them too much.
The proposal, approved this week by the Senate Armed Services Committee, also would narrow the definition of an enemy combatant and tighten restrictions on the types of evidence used to prosecute and keep a person detained.
The bill is aimed primarily at increasing legal protections for the hundreds of people captured by the United States and held for years on suspicion of terror ties without a trial. Only those selected for prosecution, typically the most high-profile suspected terrorists, are guaranteed legal counsel and other rights when they go to court.
Of the people whose files I reviewed, most were picked up on the battlefield or in al-Qaida safehouses. They certainly shouldn't be released. In fact, they shouldn't get a trial until we're certain that we've gleaned every ounce of information from them.
The legislation has raised red flags at the White House as potential veto bait and among congressional Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, who said he was concerned that aspects of the bill may go too far. "Any changes have to meet the test for me that they will not compromise our ability to wage war," said Graham, R-S.C., in a telephone interview Friday.Sen. Graham is too squishy for my tastes on immigration and interrogation techniques but I agree with him on this issue.
Posted Saturday, May 26, 2007 12:43 AM
No comments.
(Do Nothing) Politics As Usual?
Robert Novak nails the Democratic Do Nothing congress where it hurts in this article:
DO-NOTHING CONGRESSThat's a major change of direction but I don't think that that's the type of change that the American people voted for last November. Much like the DFL-dominated legislature in Minnesota, Pelosi's Democrats are long on rhetoric and short on achievements.
After five months of Democratic control, Congress has enacted no major legislation and finished no regular appropriations bill. It has successfully renamed six federal buildings and one national park, extended the lives of two government commissions and reduced the membership of the Red Cross board of governors from 50 to 10.
In addition, Congress kept the government going with temporary spending legislation, redesignated five Eastern European countries (Albania, Macedonia, Croatia, Georgia and Ukraine) for security aid, strengthened penalties against animal fighting and authorized construction of 541 feet of road in St. Louis County, Mo. An emergency bill financing the war in Iraq and Afghanistan was vetoed by President Bush before a bill acceptable to him was passed before the Memorial Day recess.
Congress faces a heavy agenda to fit into a schedule interrupted by several recesses before the end of the year.
A case in point is their inaction on enacting lobbying reform. I guess Gen. John Murtha vetoed that because it would eliminate the only friends he has in Washington.
Mind you, I'm not complaining. Every day that the Democrats do nothing is a good day for sane governance in the United States.
Posted Saturday, May 26, 2007 8:24 AM
Comment 1 by Justin Thyme at 17-Jun-07 09:22 AM
The BS surrounding the functions and alleged waste represented by the NDIC has got to stop. New information is now available in this article: Critics give false impression of NDIC's vital task.
The NDIC has become a political football. The Center's portrayal in the media by Administration operatives bent on nailing Murtha has been nothing short of shameful.
You've Gotta Love This Guy's Philosophy
I just happened across Bill Jungbauer's blog. Bill says that his politics are influenced by a pair of Teds. Here's what I'm talking about:
I am influenced by Teddy Roosevelt and Ted Nugent.I admit it. I'm genetically predisposed to liking anyone who likes Ted Nugent's thinking. A good shot of Nugent-styled libertarianism in the morning goes a long ways.
Bill ran against James Metzen, the president of the Minnesota Senate who was recently arrested for DUI.
Based on the things he posted, I really like Bill's blog. It'll definitely become part of my daily reading.
Posted Saturday, May 26, 2007 12:57 PM
Comment 1 by Bill Jungbauer at 11-Jan-08 05:52 PM
I thank you for the complement. Your blog is exemplary. I will include a link to Letfreedomring.com on my site.
That Was Wrong
That's the conclusion that Larry Schumacher comes to in this SC Times article. Here's the first thing that Larry was upset with:
I don't know if House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher and Democrats' decision to run roughshod over the GOP minority to finish on time was within the rules, but I know it was wrong.It was wrong, Larry, especially because Kelliher recognized Tony Sertich when he didn't have the floor. Sertich used that time to "call the previous question", a little-used technical procedure to stifle debate. That's wrong & then some.
House Republicans were stalling, running the clock out to force a special session. Many of them believed House Democrats would take the blame if the people's work didn't get done on time.There was some stalling happening Larry, which is the only option that the out-of-control DFL left them. The other thing that was happening was that they simply didn't know the content of the bills. When you're being called on to vote on 500-700 page bills containing billions of dollars of spending, the minimum demandment is that people know what's hidden in the bills. The DFL didn't come close to meeting that demandment.
The public's trust in government is very, very low, and another failure to complete the people's business on time would have hurt us all. I'm not sure House Minority Leader Marty Seifert, R-Marshall, realizes that.Marty didn't realize that because the GOP stuck to its principles & tried to get its agenda passed. The public's trust is damaged most when politicians don't do what they say during campaigns. This video tells which party told the whoppers. That party was also the party in power.
To lawmakers: Stop pretending this is a game and the only way to win is for the other side to lose. It's not.This isn't a game but the DFL was the party that played the most games. In fact, it wasn't even close. Twice, the House voted unanimously to have the House Rules Committee investigate the allegations that Lori Swanson fired at least one attorney in the AG's office for trying to organize a union in the AG's office. Twice, Sertich refused to even conduct a hearing or hear testimony. Simply put, that's unacceptable. As my neighbor said yesterday, firing people for trying to organize a union is against the law. Federal law at that.
The DFL also held up the most important bills to the last second in an attempt for them to pressure GOP legislators. They gambled that they could create a chaos that would lead some GOP legislators to jump ship. They gambled wrong.
Let's also examine the consequences of the legislation that the DFL passed:
- The DFL passed legislation that would've raised a big assortment of taxes to the tune of $5 billion, which would've killed Minnesota's economy in a hurry.
- The DFL passed an HHS omnibus bill that will get Minnesota fined $26 million for failing to comply with federal welfare guidelines.
- The DFL passed the Dream Act before dropping it out of the Higher Education conference report. The DFL bet that Minnesotans would agree with them that we should subsidize illegal immigrants' college tuitions. Minnesotans from all across the state told them they wouldn't.
But Monday night's shameful displays make me just as uneasy. For all the cynics' desire to scapegoat our politicians for everything that's wrong today, I think Monday night says more about us than them.I appreciate Larry's introspection but I'll respectfully disagree that Monday night's floor session says more about us than them. I put the vast majority of the blame for Monday night's trainwreck squarely on Maggie Kelliher's & Tony Sertich's shoulders. And on Larry Pogemiller's shoulders, too.
They passed outrageous legislation & then tried bullying the GOP into voting for it. Pogemiller, Clark, Kelliher & Sertich led the DFL in a session-long game of 'My way or the Highway'. Sertich was the chief practitioner of that tactic but he wasn't alone. Sen. Steve Murphy frequently played that game. Sen. Sandy Pappas played it, too.
One last thing needs to be talked about: Tony Sertich's stunts during the House Permanent Rules debate. His conduct in sabotaging the GOP's common sense amendments was partisanship at its worst. It also contributed to Monday night's trainwreck.
Let's remember that the GOP offered 26 amendments to the House Permanent Rules. Let's never forget that Tony Sertich helped defeat 25 of those amendments. Here's the most noteworthy rules he killed:
PER DIEM PAYMENTS: By a 60-57 division, the DFL majority narrowly rejected Rep. Olson's A-31 amendment to require a direct vote by all 134 Representatives to ratify the Rules Committee's decision on the increased per diem payments.Folks, I dare anyone to read those last two amendments & tell me that following those rules wouldn't have made Monday night a much more orderly process.
ADVANCE NOTICE ON SPENDING BILLS: The DFL majority rejected Rep. Olson's proposal to give Representatives at least 48 hours to read bills and 24 hours' notice before taking up legislation on the Floor. The A-21 amendment lost by an 82-50 margin.
LEAVE TIME FOR FINAL BUDGET ACTION: By a 78-50 margin, the DFL majority rejected Rep. Olson's A-15 amendment to leave at least one week at the end of a regular session to deal with conference reports or pass substitutes bills before a special session would be triggered.
FAIR NOTICE ON BUDGET BILLS: Under current rules, the majority is required to announce by 5:00 on the preceding day when major finance bills will be considered by the full House. Under the DFL's proposed rules, that would be cut to two-hour's notice on the day of the bill hearing. Rep. Dean Simpson (R-New York Mills) asked the House to expand that to six hours' notice so that citizens with an interest in the bill could be outside the House chamber to provide expertise and guidance to Representatives on the House Floor. The DFL killed the A-32 amendment with a procedural motion by a 79-50 vote.
In the end, though, blame must be affixed to the DFL for the trainwreck. During this legislative session, I talked with half a dozen GOP legislators & probably half a dozen legislative assistants on a regular basis. They all said the same thing: that the DFL was in full 'My way or the highway' mode.
In fact, I talked with Dan Severson at Gov. Pawlenty's St. Cloud press conference Tuesday. Dan told me that only 5% of the amendments & legislation that the GOP offered were approved this session. With all due respect to the DFL, that's a pathetic display of partisanship.
Frankly, I can only picture Paul Wellstone & Hubert Humphrey rolling over in their graves at the DFL's behavior. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Posted Sunday, May 27, 2007 7:58 AM
No comments.
The Murtha Democrats
That's the title of Matthew Continetti's latest Weekly Standard column, a must read column in my opinion. One of the central themes of the article is that Democrats have had trouble getting a grip on governing, something that I wrote about here. Here's the opening salvo of Mr. Continetti's article:
It was May 17, and Rogers, a Michigan Republican, was standing on the House floor listening to Rep. Jack Murtha chew him out. Rogers knew why. He sits on the Select Committee on Intelligence, and had tried to eliminate $23 million that Murtha, the antiwar, big-spending Pennsylvania Democrat, had earmarked for the National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC). The NDIC is a costly, controversial, and scandal-plagued bureaucracy located in the heart of Murtha's district. Rogers wanted to put the $23 million into human intelligence operations and recruitment, programs he says are shortchanged in next year's intelligence appropriations bill.There's several points just screaming to be made here.
Murtha disagreed. Committee Democrats backed him, and Rogers's amendment killing the center was defeated in committee. That didn't stop Rogers. He filed another amendment, this one directing the Justice Department to audit the center, which since its creation in 1993 has gone through more than a half-dozen directors and cost taxpayers about $400 million, all the while duplicating work that is done elsewhere. Again, Murtha and committee Democrats opposed Rogers. They defeated the audit amendment.
The story doesn't end there. After Kansas Republican Todd Tiahrt backed Rogers in committee, Murtha went after Tiahrt on the House floor, jabbing his finger at his colleague and threatening retribution. Tiahrt isn't discussing the exchange, but the moment was captured on C-SPAN.
That still didn't stop Rogers. Using a favorite Republican procedural tactic known as a motion to recommit, he called for the intelligence bill to be sent back to committee just before the full House voted on it at about 1 A.M. on May 11. Murtha was furious. Democrats tabled the motion to recommit, and a half-hour later the intelligence bill passed more or less on party lines, 225 to 197.
Murtha made sure other congressmen were around when he went after Rogers. He wanted to send a message. The exchange lasted around two minutes. Murtha used foul language, telling Rogers he would be sure to kill any of Rogers's earmarks if they came up in the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, which Murtha chairs. Rogers protested, saying that's not the way things are done here. That's the way I do it, Murtha said. Murtha doesn't dispute Rogers's account.
The problem was that Murtha had just violated House rules. In their efforts to "drain the swamp" of congressional corruption after taking office in January, House Democratic leaders issued a rule saying members were forbidden from conditioning support for earmarks on another member's voting record. Rogers, a former FBI agent, saw an opportunity. On the evening of May 21 he offered a resolution on the House floor censuring Murtha for violating House rules. The House defeated the motion the next day, on a party-line vote with only a couple of defections. Rogers had gone toe-to-toe with Murtha and lost. But not before embarrassing House Democrats.
-
John Murtha runs the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee like it's his kingdom. Murtha got upset when Mike Rogers tried stripping 'King' Murtha of his
bribery machineappropriations powers. - John Murtha's empire couldn't function if not for his bribes and intimidation.
- In Murtha's empire, little consideration is given to how appropriations impacts US military policy. Simply put, the only consideration is how Rep. Murtha can browbeat and intimidate committee members into supporting his agenda.
- Rep. Murtha chooses which rules he'll pay attention to. That's what his finger-wagging stunt was.
-
Rep. Murtha is anti-reform. What other explanation is there for him to lead the charge against having the NDIC audited? Murtha and his anti-reformist allies in the
Caucus of CorruptionHouse Democratic Caucus voted against accountability on a party line vote.
Here's another shot across the House Democrats' bow:
Democrats enter their sixth month in power having passed only one item on their "Six for '06" agenda into law: a staggered increase in the minimum wage. But even this was passed with substantial concessions to Republicans (tax cuts to offset the cost to small businesses) and as part of an overall defeat, the Democrats' retreat on Iraq war spending. Until last week, Democrats were adamant that any war bill contain a timetable for American withdrawal from Iraq. But they backed down at the last minute, passing a bill 280-142 in the House and 80-14 in the Senate that has no timetable and no restrictions on troop deployment.Democrats started the session as a bunch of confident bullies but have long ago morphed into an ineffective, spineless lot. Among their 'accomplishments' are to vote for the biggest tax increase in American history and against bureaucratic accountability. That isn't the type of record that a political party should feel confident about running on. In fact, I suspect that Democratic strategists are worrying themselves sick over this list of 'accomplishments'.
On no issue are Democratic difficulties more apparent than ethics. Next to Iraq, corruption was the most important issue in last year's elections. It was solely responsible for a few Democratic gains, such as Nick Lampson's victory in the heavily Republican district that Tom DeLay once represented, and Tim Mahoney's close victory over Joe Negron, the Republican who had the misfortune of running for Mark Foley's former seat in a strong Republican district in Florida.As I said earlier, John Murtha is the poster child of the anti-reform movement. Sadly, he's got lots of liberal 'company' in that movement. Here's some noteworthy 'leaders' of the movement:
Yet many veteran House Democrats fought meaningful ethics reform, gutting a measure that would have placed restrictions on a congressman's ability to jump from Capitol Hill to K Street and forcing the
House leadership to hold a vote on a separate bill requiring lobbyists to disclose the amount of money they "bundle" from clients and send to politicians. It was the House Republicans, again led by Texas's Smith, who played a constructive role, adding amendments that apply the new regulations to state and local lobbyists, extend the bundling-disclosure provision to donations to political action committees, and require lobbyists to identify the earmarks they want entered into spending bills.
- William Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat with the $90,000 in cash the FBI found in his freezer;
- appropriator Alan Mollohan, the West Virginia Democrat who during his 14 years in Congress has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to his rural district. Mollohan is under investigation for using some of that money to enrich himself.
That isn't the change that voters voted for last November.
Posted Sunday, May 27, 2007 12:41 PM
Comment 1 by MariesTwoCents at 27-May-07 02:56 PM
God bless our fallen heros and those serving today.
You have a wonderful Memorial Day Weekend :-)
Swails Anticipating Tough Campaigning?
I'd never heard of Rep. Swails before today but she makes alot of sense in this WC Trib article. Let's first lay the groundwork for her comments with this information:
On a sunny day last August, House Democrats told reporters gathered at the Minnesota State Fair their top three issues in the 2007 legislative session would be health care, education and property tax relief. Senate Democrats later embraced those three priorities, while adding more of their own. But if success is defined as getting priorities passed into law, they didn't fare well.You're defined by your accomplishments & failures. Simply put, the DFL shoved each of their priorities aside when they decided to focus their energy on passing their tax increases. That's the simplest way of telling you what they did.
Why they did that is just as simply explained; increasing taxes is the most important thing to the average DFL legislator, especially if it's a 'tax on the rich' . So how do DFL legislative leaders see this last session? Here's a sampling from the article:
After the legislative session adjourned, House Majority Leader Tony Sertich of Chisholm was asked if Democrats achieved a passing grade. "I absolutely believe so," he responded.Let's be honest, Tarryl. Gov. Pawlenty had a serious property tax plan that didn't require raising taxes. The DFL ignored his proposal. That doesn't mean he didn't have a superior property tax relief plan. Let's also admit, Tarryl, that Gov. Pawlenty didn't say no to property tax relief. He said no to the DFL tax increase to pay for the DFL's imaginary property tax relief.
Take property tax relief. That was Senate Democrats' No. 1 priority and generally listed as No. 3 among House Democrats. "The governor said 'no' to that," Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark of St. Cloud said.
As for Mr. Sertich's statement that Democrats deserved a passing grade, that's utterly laughable. Yesterday, I told King & Michael about Maggie Kelliher's statement that she'd give the DFL a "B+ or A-", to which King said that that's how grades get inflated. King, I totally agree. That's why I've settled on a D as the DFL's final grade for the session. That's a passing grade but it certainly isn't something to be proud of.
Now let's look at things through Rep. Swails ' eyes:
The reason Democratic priorities fizzled was because of "a difference in political philosophies that collided here," said Rep. Marsha Swails, DFL-Woodbury. Voters who hoped to see DFL priorities achieved over the session likely won't blame the governor, Swails said. "They'll blame the Legislature, sadly," Swails said.Rep. Swails is likely feeling the heat because she's a freshman from the suburbs & because she's the vice chair of the House Ways & Means Committee. Her not getting property tax relief signed into law will cause troubles on the campaign trail. Her voting for most of the tax increases will cause even bigger troubles for her on the campaign trail. Based on this information, I'd say that Rep. Swails has lots to worry about:
STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 56B Totals PctShe won by 448 votes in a very anti-GOP year. Now she has to run in a decidedly more pro GOP year after voting to increase taxes by billions of dollars. That's the definition of swimming upstream against a fast current.
Democratic-Farmer-Labor MARSHA SWAILS 10039 51.10
Republican KAREN KLINZING 9591 48.82
There's some definitely juicy quotes in here from Tarryl. Here's a couple of my favorites:
"We made very modest steps," Clark said.TRANSLATION: We didn't pay off our Education Minnesota allies in this budget so grab your wallets, Minnesota. We're raising your taxes the first chance we get. Come hell or high water, we're gonna pay off our political allies.
"We can get the kinks out, but we need to find money ," she said. "It is a baby step."
Sertich said many expected more from this year's Legislature. "There were higher expectations, not just by legislators but by the public," he said. "But ultimately you have to deal with the governor at the end of the day."Tony, it's a shame that you did nothing to cooperate with Gov. Pawlenty. At the end of the day, that'll go a long ways towards how voters judge the DFL's performance this session. The truth is that the DFL took a 'my way or the highway' approach to legislating. That's the fastest way to turn off key suburban swing voters.
In the face of Pawlenty's opposition, Democrats dropped a new income tax on the richest Minnesotans, which was destined to give property tax relief to all homeowners. The slimmed-down tax bill awaiting a veto included a slimmed-down tax relief provision. Without the tax bill, Minnesotans can expect their property taxes to jump $600 million in the next two years. "We would have loved to do more for property tax," Sertich said.That's a pile of rubbish & Rep. Sertich knows it. The income tax that they passed would've caused a recession, wiping out the property tax relief. Rep. Sertich knows that that's how the DFL property tax was setup. He knows it because House Taxes Chair Ann Lenczewski said so here:
House Tax Committee Chair Ann Lenczewski says that everyone would benefit from the House DFL plan. The property tax relief isn't guaranteed, though:As King said on the Final Word, the income tax was guaranteed, the property tax relief wasn't. In fact, King's analysis of the tax bill is that it would almost force a tax increase on us if it's signed. The reason King gives for that analysis is that there's an inflation adjustment included in the bill that would show that the budget surplus that currently exists doesn't exist. The inflation accelerator is a device whose sole use is to give the DFL cover to raise taxes even more.
However, that relief will not come if money is not available to fund it.
Rep. Sertich knows that Gov. Pawlenty had a property tax proposal, too, but his didn't include a 'soak the rich' tax increase in it, which is what the DFL was shooting for. Now the DFL's stubbornness will cost them in November, 2008. Thanks for the gift, Tony & Maggie, Tarryl & Pogey. You're the new gift that keeps on giving.
Posted Monday, May 28, 2007 1:05 AM
No comments.
Must Reading!!!
Cindy at Lady Logician has written two posts about the upside & downside of purists in the GOP. Both are must reads for anyone who wants to make the Minnesota GOP the best it can be. Here's the most important part of Cindy's posts:
Today if you ask certain people within the MNGOP why we lost last fall, they will say it was because of dis-satisfaction with the war. However, that is not entirely the case! Large numbers of the Republican base - mostly the purists stayed home because the party was ignoring them. The sooner that the state and national GOP parties realize that, the better off that they will be.Simply put, we need the purists to return & we need the pragmatists to welcome the purists back. The best way to achieve that is reminding ourselves of one of the wisest things Ronald Reagan said:
So what's the solution? The pragmatists and the purists need to realize that they need each other. The purists help us define the issues of the day and the pragmatists help us to get the issues acted on. Winning an election is like sailing across a lake. Pragmatists will argue about which mode is best to get across the lake - do we walk around, fly over, take a sail boat/row boat or do we swim across? Purists help us decide which mode of transport is best - however they will want to sail in a straight line across the lake when sometimes you need to tack across.
Pragmatists and Purists compliment each other. We are two pieces of a greater whole. When the parties and politicians realize that, we can do great things. When they (and we) ignore one for the other - we lose elections. It's that simple!
"It's amazing what we can accomplish if we don't care who gets the credit."It's time that we reminded each other of the wisdom in Ronald Reagan's words.
Posted Monday, May 28, 2007 1:28 AM
Comment 1 by The Lady Logician at 28-May-07 10:46 AM
Great Reagan quote Gary! Thanks.
LL
What We Got Here Is a Failure to Communicate
No, this isn't a review of Cool Hand Luke. It isn't even a review of Strother Martin's movie career. It's one of the main themes in Robert Novak's latest column. The main purpose of the column, though, is to talk extensively about John Murtha's addiction to pork, especially pork sent to people who contribute heavily to his campaign warchest.
On May 10, as the Intelligence bill neared passage, Flake took the floor of the House to relate how Capitol Hill works. Told there were no earmarks attached to the bill, a skeptical Flake sought the measure's classified annex but was sent on a wild goose chase for earmarks, first to the clerk of the House and then to the parliamentarian. When he finally found 26 earmarks, it was five hours after the deadline to submit amendments to the bill. Flake requested a secret session of the House on Intelligence earmarks, but got no support from either party.We the people demanded that Congress wipe out corruption. We the people demanded real reforms. Instead, we got John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi stonewalling the reforms that would've dramatically reduce the corruption. In fact, John Murtha is the poster child of corruption and excessive cronyism. John Murtha isn't a hero or a Democratic hawk. He's just a corrupt old man who's handed out billions of dollars of earmarks on defense contracts.
Five days later, in a letter to House Republican Leader John Boehner, Flake revealed (without describing them) Murtha's two earmarks for the Johnstown-based Concurrent Technologies. One provides $2.5 million for the Mobile Missile Monitoring and Detection program. The other supplies $3 million for the Joint Intelligence Training & Education with Advanced Distributed Learning Technological Phase II.
Murtha's earmark requests attest (as required by the new reforms) that "neither I nor my spouse had any financial interest" in either project. What he did not attest was that officers and employees of Concurrent Technologies contributed $56,475 to Murtha from the 2000 election cycle to the present. That includes $4,500 from CEO and President Daniel DeVos and $5,000 from Vice President Emil Sarady.
Let's take it a step further. I dare anyone to name a single Murtha policy initiative that's benefited our military or national security. I'd submit to you that his 'legacy' will be his participation in ABSCAM, his advising Clinton to abandon the mission in Somalia and his declaring that the US military couldn't defeat the terrorists and jihadists in Iraq.
Unfortunately, the House GOP 'leader' hasn't acted with any zeal to eliminate earmarks:
Flake, in his May 15 letter to Boehner, made "another appeal" for House Republicans "to take a more proactive position in opposition to earmarks." The minority leader did not respond. Instead, on May 21, Boehner wrote Speaker Nancy Pelosi that Murtha's $23 million earmark for a National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown was "a questionable project" secured by "highly suspect methods." Indeed, the project was not placed on the earmark list, as required by the new rules. An effort by Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan to eliminate this project led to Murtha's notorious threats, in violation of House rules, to eliminate Rogers's own earmarks "now and forever."I said that John Boehner wasn't a leader when Tom DeLay was forced out as Majority Leader. I also said that he's too much the Washington insider to be a reformer. I've stood by those opinions from then until now. Novak's column is vindication for that opinion.
In fact, Rogers, a 43-year-old former FBI agent, has 10 current earmarks to protect, costing more $45 million. Flake is a rare Republican who understands that pounding on Democrats will not cure the GOP's earmark addiction. "I am concerned," Flake wrote Boehner, "that the only action taken regarding earmarks by Republicans thus far this year is to ask for clarification of the earmark rules, in order to ensure that we can take full advantage of earmark opportunities." Boehner, who personally does not use earmarks, told me "I can't agree with that." But he did not respond to Flake.
If Washington Republicans were smart, something that I don't believe, they'd make the Democrats' failure to take corruption seriously a main theme of their 2008 campaign. Unfortunately, Tom Cole doesn't think that spending was a contributing factor to the GOP's 2006 defeats. Anyone that thinks that way won't think that the corruptive effects of earmarks are a big deal either.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey first skirted the new rules by claiming no earmarks were contained in the supplemental appropriations. Last week, he decreed that henceforth, earmarks in his bills would not be revealed until a measure passes both the House and Senate.It's time that Porkbusters got hot under the collar about that type of arrogance. It's time that we told Chairman Obey that we tell him what to do, that he doesn't tell us which rules he'll choose to obey. It's time that we told Washington what is and isn't acceptable. After all, it's our money.
Posted Monday, May 28, 2007 9:53 AM
No comments.
Jihad Through Litigation
That's the only way that I can describe what's behind a story that I first found on Gateway Pundit. I followed Jim's link to Atlas Shrugs, which led me to Bill Warner's website. Let's first establish what's happening. Here's what Pam at Atlas Shrugs writes:
If the Muslims get away with this "test case", it will shut us all down. The intrepid blogger and PI (and valued Atlas source) has been sued for publishing stories about Muslims with ties to Islamic terror. News stories already published in the mainstream media. Warner obviously hit a nerve. This is the next nefarious step in the litigation jihad. Warner must prevail. This wreaks of CAIR. Their tactics are written all over it. How is this different than the CAIR lawsuit against the Jane/John Does on the US Airways flight that reported the belligerent, aggressive behavior of the six imams?) Perhaps we need legislation to protect us (what happened to free speech?)
Bill Warner writes me the following;
Blogger sued and facing an injunction to cease and desist publishing stories about Muslims linked to terrorism
This is a serious threat to First Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech for bloggers and news reporters everywhere, and if I lose the law suit and the injunction is enforced, it will set a precedent for future law suits and injunctions to be imposed on any blogger or news reporter who writes about Muslims linked to terrorism.
The motivation behind the lawsuit against Bill Warner becomes obvious here:
What if Al Qaeda has found a new method to launder money around the world? In his July5, 2005 testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, terrorism expert Steven Emerson made a chilling prophecy. He said that he would not be surprised someday to find an international network of stolen car rings raising money for terrorism, and shipping cars to the Middle East to be made into car bombs.Now let's examine the man who filed the lawsuit against Mr. Warner. His name is Abdul Raouf M. Dabus. Here's what we know about Mr. Dabus, thanks to Mr. Warner:
Emerson did not know that Bill Warner, a Florida Private Investigator had been secretly working on this issue since 2002. Warner has uncovered documentary evidence that stolen cars from Florida were being shipped to Al Qaeda front companies in Dubai, U.A.E., Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and Aqqaba, Jordan. Furthermore, Warner claims that he has provided Federal agencies with a "smoking gun" document; a copy of the bill of lading from a Tampa used car lot shipping a vehicle directly to what appears to be an Al Qaeda front company in Saudi Arabia.
Even more embarrassing to the FBI, Warner showed the federal agents that the suspected used car lots in Florida all had a common link:
these used car lots were either owned by convicted terrorist Sami Al Arian or run by one of his associates. Warner's evidence has been analyzed by an organization of active and retired police, military and intelligence professionals, www.IntelligenceSummit.org. Their conclusion is that Warner has indeed uncovered an huge car smuggling ring that finances terrorism with "trade based money laundering".
At first, authorities were incredulous that a terrorist financing network so large could have escaped their attention. Partly as a result of Warner's ground breaking discoveries, arrests of Muslim car dealers connected to money laundering for terrorism have now been made in at least twenty five cities around the world, including Salt Lake City Utah, Anaheim CA, Chicago IL, Buffalo NY, Houston TX, St. Louis MO, Toledo OH, Tampa FL, Sarasota Fl, Los Angeles CA, Tustin CA, Arlington VA, Miramar FL, Madrid Spain, Jeddah SA, Medina SA, Jubail SA, Hamburg GR, Niggiat Japan, Dubai UAE, Tangier Morocco, London UK, Amman Jordan, Toronto CA, Ash Shuwaykh Kuwait, and Belfast, Northern Ireland.
The amounts of money involved are staggering. According to law enforcement surveillance, each car lot could ship an average of five used cars a month to the Middle East, where they have been resold for $30,000 to $45,000 (with some luxury cars selling as high as $75,000). That could earn as much as a quarter of a million dollars per month, or three million per year per car lot. Just from the few dozen car lots that are know to law enforcement, terrorist groups have the potential to raise close to one hundred million dollars per year. Al Qaeda's car smuggling system has been in operation for more than a decade. Conservatively, more than a billion dollars from the car connection has gone to the cause of global terrorism in the last ten years.
In the meantime, the cars keep loading onto the roll on-roll off ships, and the car bombs keep killing the innocent in Iraq.
On 5/21/2007 I was served summons of Complaint and an Injunction by the Mcintrye Law Firm of Tampa Fl who represent Abdul Raouf M. Dabus in a Defamation Law Suit against myself and my company for supposedly linking Mr. Dabus and his company VIP Motors in Tampa with shipping vehicles to the Middle East for resale in support of terrorism and that Mr. Dabus had worked at the Islamic Academy of Florida with Sami Al-Arian (The School that Terrorism Built) as an instructor from 1999 to an unknown point and that Mr. Dabus was linked to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and that such information is posted on my web site www.wbipi.com.I've since done a bit more digging into Mr. Dabus. Here's what I've found:
He's on the prosecution's witness list in the al-Arian trial. He also testified at that trial.
Dabus isn't a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) but " he supported the PIJ's charitable work in Israel's occupied territories."
I won't play the guilt by association card but I'll question why Mr. Dabus filed the lawsuit now. People have been publishing articles about this ring since 2002. The Boston Globe, Time Magazine & other prominent media outlets have written about the arrests being made. The only thing I can think of is that he was emboldened by the CAIR-Flying Imams lawsuit. Frankly, I think that he's hurting himself and his cause with this lawsuit. All it's going to do is attract attention to him and this smuggling ring.
Posted Monday, May 28, 2007 9:34 PM
Comment 1 by goallypeidodo at 15-Oct-07 02:16 PM
There's some special secret Sale link on Amazon, EBay, etc. where you can find very good discounts:
http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com
I've seen discounts there as low as 75% off sticker Price.
Comment 2 by Muslims Against Sharia at 09-Nov-07 04:40 PM
Emerson, a Jew who gets it
A perspective of a moderate Muslim
At the risk of sounding anti-Semitic, I want to say this: either American Jews are completely clueless about the internal struggle inside Islam or they are so cowardly, that they are even afraid to voice their opinion. Or maybe it's a combination of both.
Every time there is a development that involves radical Islam, be it a Mayor of New York attending an Islamist parade, DOJ's officials attending an Islamist conference, or a protester being sued for having the balls to expose an Islamist-sponsored event at an amusement park, the American Jewish community is as quiet as a church mouse. It's like it is not even there.
The effect of this silence is devastating. Not for the Jewish community, not yet. That time is still to come. The silence affects the American Muslim community. Every time moderate Muslims are ignored and Islamists are legitimized (by either direct support from government representatives or silent support of the ADL), radicals gain ground. In the current PC climate, moderate Muslims have pretty much no choice but to keep their mouths shut.
Luckily for us, not everyone in the Jewish community is like that. There are some Jews that are speaking out. One of them is Steven Emerson, who has been warning the West about the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism since before PanAm 103. Most of his current work is focused on exposing the radicals masquerading as the moderates ; those radicals who are embraced by the DOJ and the Pentagon, by the mayor of New York Bloomberg (Rudy would never get into bed with terrorist supporters) and the Treasury Department, by the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security, by the Congress and the White House.
There is a war of ideas within Islam, and moderate Muslims are losing. Most of Muslim clergy and Muslim establishment are paid for by the Wahhabis. Moderate Muslims are being run out of Mosques and community centers, and in many cases are physically threatened. Moderate Muslims have no place in the media or public debate, because the place reserved for Muslims is filled by Islamic radicals, who attempt to make criticizing anything Islamic a taboo. According to the Islamists, a Muslim can do no wrong.
1. When a non-Muslim criticizes Islam or Muslims, he/she is an Islamophobe.
2. When a Muslim criticizes Islam or Muslim, he/she is not a real Muslim, therefore see #1.
This is a tactic used by "moderate" Muslims, the darlings of the government and the media. But how can you call someone who praises bin Laden, or has ties to Hamas, or calls for the elimination of Israel, or wants to replace the Constitution with the Koran a moderate? They are anything but moderates, however nobody except for a few people like Steven Emerson seems to notice that. But even when the Emersons of America appeal to the public, they are often being dismissed as alarmists and racists. Well, they are anything, but. You don't have to be a clairvoyant to predict the future when it comes to expansion of radical Islam and extinction of moderate Muslims. All you need to do is get your heads out of the sand.
Why our government is so forgiving and forgetful when it comes to individuals or organizations with known terrorist ties and anti-American views is beyond me. Why the Jewish leaders are so timid when it comes to the subject of radical Islam is incomprehensible.
I thank God every day for people like Steven Emerson, because they are the last glimmer of hope for moderate Muslims.
K.M.
Original post
