H/T: CSM

Brigadier General Michael Walsh appeared before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works yesterday to discuss the restoration process of the New Orleans’ levee system due to the damage created by Hurricane Katrina.

There’s still a lot of work to be done. Billions of dollars have been spent and there are no permanent structures in some areas that would prevent such a disaster from occurring again.

Obviously Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer has a right to be concerned with this. After all, it’s her committee.

Did she voice her concern?

Absolutely. But what got her most rankled was when she wasn’t addressed properly. It seems that “ma’am” — a term deemed appropriate by a Military Protocol guide — isn’t good enough for the senator. She demands the title “Senator”. So much so that she interrupted his testimony to scold him for the apparent lack of respect.

The liberals are (already) becoming awfully smug in power.  I cannot wait to send them to the unemployment lines in 2010! 

In the way too voluminous comments section  on my last post, many Romney supporters have tried to extrapolate predictions for 2012 based on Romney’s 2008 performance v. Mike Huckabee. It was a beautiful thread with attempts to expel states from the South, but I think there are two key points that get missed that make 2008 a less helpful measure of 2012.

1) Money: Romney raised and spent more than $100 million. Huckabee raised $16 million. As such, Romney had more money for travel, more money for campaign ads, more money for staffers, more money for everything. Romney had the money to build a 50 state organization. Huckabee did not.

When the money topic has been raised in the past, there have been two responses:

a) The money doesn’t matter. Huckabee could have as much money as Romney and it would make no difference. Of course the idea is absurd. If raising money didn’t matter, then every candidate would live off the land. There’s no reason to spend the effort needed to raise $107 million, when you could win just as easily with $30 million. I’ll believe that money doesn’t matter on the day I hear Mitt Romney forswear fundraising. If Huckabee had more money, he’d have had more paid people, more people working full time for the campaign in places like Florida and South Carolina.

b) Money is a measure of popular support: The argument goes that Huckabee’s inability to raise $107 million is a sign that Huckabee lacks popular support. This is silly. In reality, Romney simply moved more in moneyed circles from his work on Wall Street.

The fact is that 2008 won’t be 2012. If Romney faces Huckabee, he won’t be facing the Governor of a small state best known in the dieting community, he’ll be facing a commentator whose been on more than 500 radio stations and served as Sean Hannity’s regular Friday Night thing for 2 years. If Romney faces Palin, he’ll be facing a woman who can draw huge crowds and who, on the day she was chosen for the GOP nomination for VP raised $10 million. The money edge will be severely weakened in 2012.

2) Media Declarations: The media took Mitt Romney seriously as a Presidential candidate long before the public even knew who he was. Not so with Huckabee who the media accepted as a great story, but whose seriousness was downplayed from the New Hampshire Primary onward. After South Carolina, many who liked Huckabee abandonned him and voted to “Stop McCain.”

Looking at nationwide polling, it would be hard to seriously argue that Huckabee couldn’t get the nomination in 2012, so his efforts would be treated with a whole different level of seriousness from the get-go.  Romney had the good fortune to be paired against a pro-choice liberal (Rudy Giuliani was three times the nominee of New York’s Liberal Party for Mayor of New York)  and the most hated men among the conservative base (John McCain.) Romney will have no such luck in 2012.

3) Time: Romney was beginning the process of running for President in 2005, with Huckabee not getting started until 2007 with no nationwide base of support or name recognition. For Both Huckabee and Palin, 2012 would be far different.

When looking at 2008, there are a lot of What If questions that occur, “What if Huckabee were better known? What if he’d won South Carolina? What if he had more money?”  Change these variables and the entire 2008 nomination contest is turned on its head. A Huck-Romney rematch will come on far different lines, so would a Romney-Palin race.

As a final note, I noted many people pledging they would not back Mike Huckabee for President if he’s the GOP nominee. Such protestations are silly. Many more made that stance with John McCain, few kept to it.

If Obama is beatable in 2012, it will mean some things have gone drastically wrong:  For example,  the U.S. savagely attacked by terrorists, the economy in shambles, rioting in the streets, attempts to nationalize health care. If the election ultimately comes down to Huckabee-Obama, how many LDS church members are going to vote for a choice that means doom for the nation over a grudge?

In a poll in February, 2008 when bad feelings towards Huckabee were at their worse, Utah did say it would have for Obama 58-42% over Huckabee. However, they also indicated they would vote Huckabee over  Hillary Clinton 59-41%. At the time, Mormons were most steamed at Huckabee and Obama was no as they hopey-changey one and many details hadn’t come out about him.  When given the clear known liberal, voters stood firm despite not being too happy with Huckabee. If this is the case when LDS voters are the most angry, that given a known liberal or Huckabee, they’ll choose Huckabee, I think we can count Utah in the safe column.  And given the number of folks who supported McCain despite not being too happy with him, I think most people on this blog who go after Huck relentlessly would still end up voting for him, so the promises of “Never” seem silly.

Remember how during the Bush administration the MSM dutifully chronicled rises in gas and diesel prices?  Well, gas prices have now increased for 50 consecutive days, but media coverage of the issue has fallen off a cliff in recent times.  Maybe all those people who blamed Bush for high fuel prices should do the same for Obama.  He MUST have oil buddies somewhere!

Caving into calls from gay rights activists to address their favored issues, Obama:

will announce tomorrow that he is extending federal benefits to include unmarried domestic partners of federal workers, including same-sex partners, White House officials said tonight.

Obama will sign an executive order implementing the change in the Oval Office, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid upstaging the president’s announcement.

The move would give partners of federal employees access to financial benefits such as relocation fees for moves. The State Department had prepared to announce a similar extension of benefits last month but has yet to do so formally, though Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called it “the right thing to do.”

A new Rasmussen poll shows Arlen Specter leading Joe Sestak in the Democratic Primary for Specter’s Senate seat:

Senator Arlen Specter leads Congressman Joe Sestak by 19 percentage points in an early look at the 2010 Democratic Senatorial Primary in Pennsylvania. The first Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the race shows Specter attracting 51% of the vote while Sestak earns 32%.

Thirty-five percent (35%) of likely Democratic Primary voters have a very favorable opinion of the incumbent senator, who recently switched parties to improve his chances for reelection. Only 18% say the same for Sestak.

The number with a very unfavorable view is virtually identical: 10% for Specter and nine percent (9%) for Sestak.

Tomorrow, Ras will publish a general election poll pitting both Specter and Sestak against Toomey.

Wall Street Journal/NBC News Political Survey

In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Barack Obama is doing as president?

• Approve 56% (61%)
• Disapprove 34% (30%)

Do you generally approve or disapprove of the job that Barack Obama is doing in handling the economy?

• Approve 51% (55%)
• Disapprove 38% (37%)

Do you generally approve or disapprove of the job that Barack Obama is doing in handling foreign policy?

• Approve 54% (56%)
• Disapprove 36% (31%)

In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Congress is doing?

• Approve 29% (28%)
• Disapprove 57% (58%)

Positive / Negative [Net]

• Barack Obama 60% (64%) / 29% (23%) [+31%]
• Sonia Sotomayor 30% / 16% [+14%]
• Democratic Party 45% (45%) / 37% (34%) [+8%]
• Republican Party 25% (29%) / 44% (44%) [-19%]
• Dick Cheney 26% (18%) / 48% (54%) [-22%]
• Nancy Pelosi 24% / 46% [-22%]
• Rush Limbaugh 23% / 50% [-27%]
• General Motors 18% / 47% [-29%]

(more…)

Axis shows its evil; Stimulus fails to stimulate and ABC becomes WHBC

Generally, much like radio talk show host Dennis Prager, I much prefer clarity to agreement, and especially so in politics. Most bi-partisan “solutions” neither solve the problem nor educate voters on which of the partisan positions would more likely have been the solution.

Hence, an America prosperous and free due to conservative Republican solutions to foreign and domestic problems, but afflicted by the recent Elephant-memory killing bipartisan past that Left No Child Behind in accumulating debt and a Republican candidate made famous as a maverick at kissing Jack Asses, chose to elect as President of the United States (POTUS) the most liberal candidate any major party ever nominated.

As a result though, clarity has returned to Washington, D.C. The most egregious taxing, spending and social policy bills passed by the ObamaDem Congress have garnered hardly any GOP votes and the President has received harsh criticism from most Republicans for his foreign apology tours.

So, come Election Day 2010, We the People will have no problem rendering a verdict on the ObamaDems, beyond any reasonable doubt.

The bad news is that the educational reality mugging by failed liberal policies usually necessary to convert liberals into conservatives will be especially harsh this time around, especially by an electorate so populated by spoiled yutes too young to remember the last one from 1979-1982.

Axis of Evil remains so in the Age of Obama

Last week, President Obama, no longer in de-Nile about his assumption of the Office of Citizen of the World (COTW), traveled to that river in Egypt to prove the effectiveness of his “words matter” campaign mantra, especially when delivered by an American largely disgusted with American policies before his Inauguration.

The Drive-by media universally praised the homily, er..speech and, Obama was right. Words do matter. Iran’s mullahs (pictured with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khatami in middle) heard the COTW/POTUS’s Chamberlainesque Peace in our Time declaration as he excused Iran’s terrorism directed against his World and American citizens for the last 30 years. They heard his acquiescence to Iran as an equal nuclear power partner while forbidding Israel from building any more screened in porch add-ons on the West Bank.

So, Iran’s totalitarians fixed this week’s election to retain as President the megalomanical Anti-Semite that Obama surrendered to and continue to mow down (see Kill, seven and counting at this publication) down non-violent protesters.

Not to worry though. Seventy-two hours after the fix, Obama is “troubled” by “the violence” (No mention of whose violence, much like he was troubling violence of Georgian bodies striking Russian bullets in Ossetia, but I digress…) but is even more troubled by the worry of offending the re-elected MembersOnlyJacket-ijad by seeming to “interfere” in an equal nation’s affairs with a statement supporting the freedom seekers.

Clarity on Iran should have arrived earlier than this week given their sponsorship of Hizbollah, with whom they killed more Americans than any other terrorist group before 911, and given their Quds forces that killed Americans in Iraq. The Drive-bys were too busy bashing Bush to make those facts clear.

Keynesian economics still doesn’t stimulate anything but government growth

The same Joe Biden that was elected Vice-President while warning that his youthful running mate would face a serious international test within six months, admitted this week that the Administration’s efforts to revive the economy had failed.

Clarity on that subject almost arrived earlier this month with the Labor Department’s release of the report that unemployment rose to its highest level in 27 years, but the Drive-bys dutifully ran interference by reporting that 9.4% was a good sign that the stimulus was working since the rate of job losses had slowed.

Rumors have it that the last act of the American Broadcasting Company, before the relocation of its headquarters and name change, was to send its employees out armed with spray paint to vandalized gasoline station pump prices and Bank mortgage rate windows.

1984 plus 25 equals White House Broadcasting Company’s (WHBC) voluntary merger with Big Brother

Charlie Gibson will anchor the first broadcast of the network made famous by Howard K. Smith, Howard Cosell and Jim McKay as WHBC from its new headquarters at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue when COTW/POTUS Obama, as new network President, issues his Health Care reform directives later this month.

The media famous for drive-by character assassination hits will merge with an Administration whose Justice Department recently dropped voter intimidation charges against Philadelphia Black Panthers.

No word yet on when the Democratic National Committee aka ACORN will join their corporate partners in public housing.

Given the above relationships, it is not surprising that Americans became so ignorant about the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Democratic party and the results of their failed liberal policies. But now, we don’t have to guess if Obama’s ears prove he is Barbara Walters’ son. Arrogance has shoved shameless First Amendment incest into the fore to bring clarity.

And we we thought gay marriage was only a “slippery slope?

The Slope Done Slipped

Incumbent republicans must needs no longer fear the Citizen of the World and the Democrats that aid and abet his clarity. Citizens of the World like Iran’s mullahs and Kim Jong Il don’t get to vote in our mid-terms. American citizens out of work, unable to afford gasoline to visit grandma or Myrtle Beach, and/or still keeping investment dollars on strike do get to vote, and clarity dictates a favorable GOP result.

Meanwhile, a number of Democrats and liberals are finding the new clarity requires revising their verdict on none other that George W. Bush aka Satan (translates Great Satan in Mullah-Persian). Thomas Friedman of the New York Times saw fit to print the news that Bush deserves credit for the now obvious success of the democracy project in Iraq and the Lebanese electoral defeat of the Hezbos. Christopher Hitchens reports that Hamas would lose a second election in Gaza.

I am reminded of a Hezbo supporter in Southern Lebanon who lost his house and a barber in Gaza who lost his barber shop, both lost to Israeli bombs retaliating against rocket launchers in their respective neighborhoods who blamed the terrorists and vowed never to support them again. They wanted their boys to play soccer, sans rubble.

Clarity sometimes takes time.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Examiner.com and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

This ad just aired on Fox News. It is the second in a series of ads that is part of United Against Nuclear Iran’s discussion with the American people, the international community and the people of Iran regarding the danger of Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

UANI is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.

You can follow UANI on Facebook and Twitter.

Here is their mission statement:

The prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran should concern every American and be unacceptable to the community of nations. Since 1979 the Iranian regime, most recently under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s leadership, has demonstrated increasingly threatening behavior and rhetoric toward the US and the West. Iran continues to defy the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations in their attempts to monitor its nuclear activities. A number of Arab states have warned that Iran’s development of nuclear weapons poses a threat to Middle East stability and could provoke a regional nuclear arms race. In short, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is a danger to world peace.

These are their objectives:

1.Inform the public about the nature of the Iranian regime, including its desire and intent to possess nuclear weapons, as well as Iran’s role as a state sponsor of global terrorism, and a major violator of human rights at home and abroad;
2.Heighten awareness nationally and internationally about the danger that a nuclear-armed Iran poses to the region and the world;
3.Mobilize public support, utilize media outreach, and persuade our elected leaders to voice a robust and united American opposition to a nuclear Iran;
4.Lay the groundwork for effective US policies in coordination with European and other allies;
5.Persuade the regime in Tehran to desist from its quest for nuclear weapons, while striving not to punish the Iranian people, and;
6.Promote efforts that focus on vigorous national and international, social, economic, political and diplomatic measures.

UANI and 30 Years After will be co-hosting an event and fundraiser in Los Angeles, California featuring former CIA Director James Woolsey and former Deputy U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mark Wallace on June 18th. Please click here or email coalitions@unitedagainstnucleariran.com for additional information.

Gov. Jindal has made his wishes known through Robert Yarborough, treasurer of Jindal’s re-election campaign, as well as his Communications Director, Melissa Sellers:

Gov. Bobby Jindal and his state campaign organization want a group of his supporters to end efforts to draft him for a presidential run in 2012 or 2016.

Dan Kyle, an officer in the “Jindal for President Draft Council” confirmed Tuesday that the treasurer of Jindal’s re-election campaign has asked that the draft efforts end. The letter from Robert Yarborough says the presidential draft effort would be a distraction from the governor’s work.

That sentiment was echoed in a statement from Jindal’s communications director, Melissa Sellers, who said Jindal supports efforts to disband the draft organization. An uncle of First Lady Supriya Jindal is an officer in the group, but has agreed to step down, the governor’s office said.

Gov. Jindal stands for re-election in November of 2011 and likely realizes that one year is too little time to transition from a gubernatorial reelection effort to a national presidential campaign requiring high levels of organization in early primary/caucus states.

There is little doubt that Jindal will sit at or near the top of the list of potential vice-presidential selections for any potential Republican nominee.

The continued, slow self-destruction of US media.

Letterman merely insulted a respected national Republican leader.  The entire ABC network apparently wants government to run nearly every part of your life, under the label of “health care;” so much so, that ABC won’t allow opposing viewpoints to its “news” coverage.

According to Drudge:

ABC is refusing to air paid ads during its White House health care presentation, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, including a paid-for alternative viewpoint!

The development comes a day after the network denied a request by the Republican National Committee to feature a representative of the party’s views during the Obama special.

Conservatives for Patients Rights requested the rates to buy a 60-second spot immediately preceding ‘Prescription for America’.

______________________________________________________________

Benjamin Hodge co-owns the Web site KansasProgress.com, based in Johnson County, KS, in the Greater Kansas City area.  You can contact Hodge on Facebook, through his Web site, and on Twitter.

What’s going on in Iran, and why am I not as optimistic as I was before about the prospect of revolution? Rumors are swirling that Rafsanjani might be attempting some sort of administrative coup, while the spectre of a Mousavi presidency still exists. The crowds chant the name of Mousavi — who fully supports the nuclear program Iran has going and sat on a founding board of Hezbollah in the early 1980′s — and many, if not most, seem to be there because they want him in charge, not because they want legitimate secular democracy.

If Iran is indeed a year away from obtaining a nuclear weapon, it might, sad as I am to say it, be better if the status quo remains: better the devil you know, after all. Having either Mousavi and Rafsanjani in charge would amount to nothing more than a half-assed revolving-door pseudorevolution and would serve no purpose but to buy the Iranians more time to come up with nuclear weapons. Mousavi’s intentions are ambiguous while Rafsanjani is more apocalyptic, but that’s irrelevant; the nukes will exist for all time, not until the next presidency ends. Mousavi may be more favorably inclined toward women than Ahmadinejad, but as far as the West is concerned, we might just be talking about the difference between Hitler and a Hitler who thinks that women should be allowed to go to school: pretty irrelevant to the Jews. Nuclear weapons simply cannot be allowed to enter the Middle East.

Only a secular democratic state will earn my endorsement. I’m horrified to admit it, but if what these revolutionaries want is a Mousavi regime — or, worse, a Rafsanjani one — I’m afraid that, for the sake of the West and Israel, I must side with the status quo.

Mike Potemra over at the Corner makes a bold prediction:

Four years from now, Mitt Romney will be president of the United States.

His basis for the prediction:

My reasoning is as follows. Point One: The Obama team, while still basking in honeymoon-level approval ratings today, has pointed itself in a direction that will result in disappointed hopes for the American people. They have drastically overpromised, and their policies—even if they are not outright disastrous—will end up inciting more passionate discontent than passionate support. Point Two: The Republicans always nominate for president the candidate who’s next in line, even if that person is deeply unpopular (e.g., the GOP base’s hatred for John McCain did not prevent him from being nominated; he was the guy who lost to Bush in 2000, ergo…). In 2008, the runner-up was Romney.

Potermo’s getting out the chicken blood and ready to begin practicing voodo punditry. We could argue over who actually finished second, but as I’ve explained before the next in line meme is pretty much useless for this election.

The meme has a 28 year history and let’s review.

Reagan was 2nd in 1976, and was nominated in 1980. Bush I was 2nd in 1980 and was nominated in 1988. Bob Dole was 2nd in 1988 and was nominated in 1996. And in 1996, Pat Buchanan finished second and was elected President in 2000.

Oh wait a s second, but he wasn’t. Of course, there were other problems that intervened in the power of finishing 2nd and allowed George W. Bush to be the nominee.

Neither Reagan, Bush, Dole, or McCain faced a returning rival from the previous campaign with name recognition, a track record of running and winning several primaries.

Neither had to deal with a defeated Vice-Presidential nominee who is capable of generating as much enthusiasm and money as Sarah Palin.

Huckabee, Palin, and Romney all stand at the starting gate on pretty much equal footing. If Romney becomes an overwhelming frontrunner, it’ll be because potential opponents like Huckabee and Palin didn’t run as happened in 1996 with Bob Dole when Jack Kemp (who led him in several trial heats) and Dan Quayle both sat out the election. If that happens, it’ll indicate that both think Obama is likely to win re-election, which would indicate that Romney won’t be President.

The fact is that the Redskins game has more predictive power than the 2nd place meme.

In the debate over whether liberals fear Sarah Palin or are merely annoyed by her and so they act incredibly unhinged, file ethics complaints, and go vile, I’m going to straddle the fence.

Are they afraid of Palin? No. Perhaps, they ought to be, but given our recent time holding the White House, I think we can well speak to the hubris that comes with power. Many people told me Obama couldn’t win, there was no way that Obama would get elected. Of course though, the 13 keys are the 13 keys and yes Obama was elected. So, no, they aren’t afraid of her. They don’t have the good sense to be afraid of her.

Are they annoyed with Palin? Annoyed is too weak of a word. Barney the Dinosaur is annoying (though probably not to liberals.) Jar Jar Binks was annoying. No, we’re talking about a whole different level.

It’s hatred, but it’s a special hatred. The left hates Palin more than it does every single white male in the Republican Party combined. Palin is in the rarified air of Clarence Thomas and Ann Coulter level of liberal hate.

As much as the left attacks people like Limbaugh, Hannity, and Tancredo, they would prefer these opponents. White middle aged and older men.

When confronted with a strong conservative woman who is a attractive, a young conservative whose not Alex Keaton, or a Black or Hispanic Conservative, their minds begin to flash big, DOES NOT COMPUTE! DOES NOT COMPUTE! DOES NOT COMPUTE! signs and they have to act to destroy what they can’t understand and to make an example of anyone in a group that should be Democratic who comes on strong as a conservative.

However, Alex is right, just because liberals hate Sarah Palin, it doesn’t make her a good candidate. However, it should be said, it also doesn’t make her a poor one. It simply has nothing to do with it.

We needn’t worry about liberals. Whoever we decide upon, they’ll have no problem hating in the most extremist and embarassing ways imaginable.

President Obama has revealed that the White House finally forecasts unemployment to reach 10 percent by the last months of the year:

Obama acknowledged that unemployment lines may keep growing despite government efforts to boost economic growth, saying he’s confident an expansion will begin “shortly.” His outlook mirrors the forecasts of private economists who predict a jobless rate of 10 percent — a level unseen since 1983 — by the final three months of the year.

This bodes well for the GOP in this year’s gubernatorial elections and next year’s midterms.

A local Florida newspaper has published an article detailing Bill McCollum’s tack toward the middle in his race against Alex Sink.  Among the highlights:

As happened with Crist, McCollum’s move to the middle has alienated some on the Republican right, who claim McCollum’s conservative credentials are tarnished by votes supporting stem cell research and protections for homosexuals.

“Most people, I don’t think, are single-issue voters,” said McCollum, in his third year as Florida’s attorney general. “I believe this campaign will be made up of a broad cross-section of Florida. When you run for state office, especially for governor, they’re looking for a problem-solver.

“I’m a conservative that believes in values, but there have been times when people of like mind will have disagreements. Hopefully there will be a degree of tolerance with intellectually different opinions,” he said.”

Gay rights and environmentalism have been present in McCollum’s voting record, but not prominent in his public persona until recently:

At last Tuesday’s meeting of the Cabinet, McCollum cited environmental concerns as he cast the lone “no” vote on approval for an expanded marina in Lee County.

His finance team chairman is Jonathan Kislak, who last year led a group that unsuccessfully opposed a constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage in the state.

And McCollum provides a sharp contrast to last year’s GOP mantra of “Drill, Baby, Drill,” by speaking out against drilling off Florida’s coast.

Such positions beg comparison to Crist, who has maintained approval ratings of more than 60 percent while shunning social conservatives and wooing Democrats.

Despite a 100 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee in each of his last five years in Congress, McCollum’s relative silence on abortion has steamed some conservatives.

Finally, today Gov. Pawlenty unveiled his cuts to the 2010 Minnesota budget:

Gov. Tim Pawlenty today dropped the unallotment ax on cities, counties, renters, colleges, state agencies and those who make donations to political candidates, cutting the budget by $2.675 billion.

Although the governor’s press conference is still going on at the Capitol, here are the highlights of the proposed unallotments (referred to as the “budget solution” in communications from Pawlenty’s office):

Local government aid will be reduced by $200 million to cities and townships and $100 million to counties.

A state program in which donations to political candidates are refunded to contributors ($50 per individual and $100 per couple) is eliminated, at a savings of $10.4 million

Human services spending will be reduced by $236 million

Higher education spending will be reduced by $100 million — $50 million from the University of Minnesota and $50 million from Minnesota State Colleges and Universities.

State agency operating budgets will be reduced by $33 million. (That includes the governor’s office, and Pawlenty suggested to legislators and constitutional officials that they make “voluntary remittances.”)

K-12 education payment deferrals and adjustments would total $1.77 billion.

Additional revenues through “administrative actions” would reduce the deficit by $169 million.

Let’s see how long it takes for the MSM and the DFL in Minnesota to spin these cuts as cold and heartless.

Our illustrious former President Carter is at it again, this time seeking to further hamper efforts to bring peace to the Middle East.  This time, his plans are to ask Pres Obama to remove Hamas from the list of terror organizations.  In particular, I love this exerpt from the article:

Carter said he feels personally responsible that American weapons were used to fight in Gaza Strip last year, when Israeli Defense Forces entered the strip to stop the launch of rockets from there into Israel.

Considering the nature of the mission undertaken by Israel at the time (i.e. to defend their country from random acts of murder), I would take pride that we stood with Israel, and would hope that our munitions were used.  Feeling shame or guilt in this instance is an absurdity from one of the largest failures to ever set foot in the office of the President of the United States.  It is a sad thing indeed that he was once leader of the free world, and a great thing that he no longer is.

Senator John Ensign can probably cancel those trips to Iowa. Still, it’s good to see with a trillion-dollar healthcare debacle and an Iranian Revolution, Politico sure knows how to prioritize.

Nevada Republican Sen. John Ensign has told colleagues that he plans to admit an extramarital affair, a senior Republican official tells POLITICO.

Political insiders in the Senate and in Nevada told POLITICO that Ensign began an affair with a staffer several months after he separated from his wife. When Ensign reconciled with his wife, the sources said, he gave the aide a severance package and parted ways. 

Sometime later, a Nevada source said, Ensign met with the husband of the woman involved and had what this source described as a positive encounter. Sources said that the man subsequently asked Ensign for a substantial sum of money – at which point Ensign decided to make the affair public. 

Secret Club President Jim DeMint decided to endorse Marco Rubio against Charlie Crist. Rubio, says DeMint, is

exactly the kind of Senator Florida needs, and exactly the kind of leader our party is looking for: a conservative’s conservative with a record of success in a swing state, a self-made first generation American, a dynamic Republican spokesman in two languages, a young husband and father himself dealing with the same problems middle class families like his face every day.

I’m sorry, but Mike Huckabee and Jim DeMint notwithstanding, an incumbent governor with a 70% approval rating is not going to be denied a Senate nomination.

Whoever wrote them, apparently over 100,000 copies have been handed out:

1.Stripping Ayatollah Khamanei of his Supreme Leadership position because of his unfairness. Fairness is a requirement of a Supreme Leader.

2. Stripping Ahmadinejad of the presidency, due to his unlawful act of maintaining the position illegally.

3.Transferring temporary Supreme Leadership position to Ayatollah Hussein-Ali Montazery until the formation of a committee to reevaluate and adjust Iran’s constitution.

4. Recognizing Mir Hossein Mousavi as the rightfully elected president of the people.

5. Formation of a new government by President Mousavi and preparation for the implementation of new constitutional amendments.

6. Unconditional release of all political prisoners regardless of ideology or party platform.

7. Dissolution of all organizations – both secret and public – designed for the oppression of the Iranian people, such as the Gasht Ershad (Iranian morality police).

Mousavi may in many ways be worse for the West. He gives an aura of change, but he’s still a Khamenei-approved candidate. If this becomes a revolution for Mousavi only, it may be better for the West if the status quo is preserved: better the devil you know, after all. We can only hope that, as many have stated, this is not just about Mousavi, but about fundamental reform.

PS – Twitter updates of note: Rumors of a coup by the army swirl, but are doubtful…rally planned for today at 5 PM Tehran time (+7 from EST)…people think that the government is on Twitter attempting to spread misinformation…certain Ayatollahs support Mousavi…

PPS – Ding ding ding! We’ve found our first Israel is behind this all conspiracy theorist!

Since the media seems to be ignoring the facts on Moussavi, I figured I would point out that Moussavi would continue to;

- Fund Iran’s nuclear program

- Fund terrorist groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah

- Fund Iran’s military expansion

Have the media forgotten that he blackmailed the United States over the issue of American hostages held by Iranian supported terrorist groups in Lebanon?

But he has promised to extend some additional rights to Iran’s women. 

Yeah for change!

This is a mandate from the High Office of Conservative Policy: please stop saying that liberals only attack Sarah Palin because they fear her.

They don’t. Why would they? No polling data bears that argument out, no interview shows her as an intellectual or cultural powerhouse, no speech she’s made is brimming with any particular insight.

She annoys the left because of her culture, certainly; she’s horrifically annoying to me, a proudly elitist misanthrope, and I dislike what she represents more than I dislike, say, Mitt Romney, due to that: she’s a proud redneck, a down-home religiously conservative Christian “hockey mom.” I don’t like that. I don’t like any of it. I’ve gone after her on several occasions for all of that. But Lord knows I don’t fear the woman, and I’m not too fond of your armchair psychoanalysis.

Just as the left mocked George W. Bush even on his way out, they mock Palin. But let me give you some insight, as both a detached observer and as someone who dislikes what Palin represents: just as they did not fear Bush, they do not fear Palin. They just hate her.

The meme to the contrary is a self-serving myth, and the logic is self-serving: if Palin is popular, as she is in Alaska, it must be because she’s loved. If Palin is unpopular, it must be because she’s loved, too — and that threatens liberals! And so whether Palin actually is a threat to liberal institutions is irrelevant; the aim is to bolster Palin, the woman who most pisses off liberals — not to analyze. It’s what Palin’s proponents want to be true, rather than what is true.

Now, don’t get me wrong: I like annoying liberals as much as the next right-winger. But I am not involved in politics to annoy liberals. This isn’t a freaking sports game and I’m not a down-with-librulz cheerleader. I support a particular ideology and I’d like to see that furthered. But those shrieks you hear aren’t ones of agony — they’re ones of laughter. Nobody “fears” Palin (except, perhaps, Mike Huckabee).

So stop making the argument.

Hence, its relentless attacks against her, Cheney, Rush and Newt

The Governor of Alaska is an unapologetic, unabashed Reagan conservative who echos the truth to power messages rarely heard from other elected conservatives too afraid of Obama and the Drive-by political correctness media police. Democrats have won the past two election cycles and now hold large majorities in both houses of Congress.

Yet, despite the triumph of liberalism, the Left doesn’t use its precious media time to attack potential threats to its power from moderate Republicans that the Drive-bys’ conventional wisdom deems more “electable” in the Age of Obama.

Rather, they regularly, relentlessly, and viciously attack the Sarah Palin, the Vice-Presidential loser that failed the Katie Couric test and returned to viewing Russia from her backyard.

Why does the Left perceive as the number one threat to retaining their power, a Republican loathed by a large and vocal minority of the GOP?

Why? Maybe because the Left has never lost its power to that particular minority of the GOP represented by Colin Powell and much of the beltway, country club blue blood Rockefeller elites.

When they lose, they lose to Republicans like Sarah Palin, and many recall their most anxious moments during the 2008 general election campaign were those weeks after Palin’s nomination was announced when McCain actually lead for the first time, before he blew the race by embracing the bank bailout.

Recent polls show that a majority of Americans are now pro-life, that conservatives now out-number moderates, and that women are much more likely to vote Democrats.

Palin is a walking, talking repudiation of the entire feminist myth of the Left that declares liberalism as the only enlightened view. And her decision to bring to term a baby in her womb confirmed as having Downs Syndrome grossly exposes the barbarity of the Leftists’ religious sacrament of abortion. DC wasn’t down with her, baby?

Moreover, Palin defends herself and conservatism when attacked, unlike former President George “new tone” W. Bush and John maverick McCain. Democrats don’t like Republicans that “break the rules” by questioning the liberal templates of the beltway that never allow conservatives to question the motives and judgment of the Left.

Sarah Palin is in a position to own the conservative base that Gallup now measures as 40% of the American people. She has the fighting quality akin to that of the kind of Republicans that win over Reagan Democrats.

And, she is a woman.  And we have seen this past week in the aftermath of the David Letterman affair, even feminists that regularly stand mute when abortion rights-protecting Democrats abuse women and when conservative pro-life women are abused, have come to her defense.

Palin can take the heat even with Obama at 62% approval. As his ratings drop, some elected Republicans in DC will grow a little courage. They are puny compared to Sarah.

The Left fears her. They should. It seems that donkeys have better memories than many elephants these days.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Examiner.com and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.

Many may have seen this story, but it definitely merits a post.  From a new Gallup poll:

How would you describe your political views — [very conservative, conservative, (or) moderate, liberal, (or) very liberal]?

• 40% Conservative
• 35% Moderate
• 21% Liberal

2009 Detailed Political Ideology

• 9% Very conservative
• 31% Conservative
• 35% Moderate
• 16% Liberal
• 5% Very liberal
• 4% No opinion

2009 Political Ideology, by Party ID

Republicans

• 73% Conservative
• 24% Moderate
• 3% Liberal

Independents

• 45% Moderate
• 34% Conservative
• 20% Liberal

Democrats

• 40% Moderate
• 38% Liberal
• 22% Conservative

This lends credence to the argument that the GOP must re-embrace conservative principles as a start toward regaining majority status.  Of course, the poll doesn’t define the conservative, moderate and liberal labels or associate them with stances on issues, but nonetheless, it appears that America remains a center-right country.

(h/t) Aron Goldman’s format for posts on polls

Is this the best our worthless president and his spokesmen can come up with?:

“The enthusiasm and robust debate these elections engendered captured the attention of the world. And the essential right of people to express themselves peacefully needs to be respected,” he noted. “The international community remains committed to seeing Iran living up to its international responsibilities, and we will continue to use all avenues to try to convince Iran to meet its international obligations,” he said.

The spokesman defended the relatively mild language of the statement on the street violence in Tehran and elsewhere, but a senior official said later that if reports of gunfire and possible casualties at a pro-opposition rally in Tehran are confirmed, it would be something the United States would condemn outright.

Kelly made clear, as did the Vice President Biden on Sunday, the election trouble has not derailed the administration’s stated commitment to try to engage Iran directly on the nuclear issue.

“This is a very serious issue, the issue of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. As we go forward we are going to make our decisions based on U.S. national interests. And of course we are following the situation very closely. But as the Vice President said yesterday, we have made the decision to pursue direct diplomacy with Iran, particularly through the multi-lateral context,” he said.

Kelly said Iranian authorities need to take vote-fraud charges seriously and look into them. But he stopped short of endorsing the announced decision of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to have the powerful Guardian Council of Islamic clerics investigate the allegations.

A revolution is in the works and all this hapless moron can think about is multilateral talks about weapons and “international obligations”?

Chicken Kiev, redux.

So I’ve now been following this, real-time, for about seven hours.

Twitter updates from the revolutionaries are greatly informative, and greatly inspiring.

http://twitter.com/tehranelection9:
The people are stopping the police…
# Tomorrow I’ve heard there is going to be a massive protest against the supreme leader…

If that’s true, it’s over. The taboo against that shattered, the regime will likely see a massive march upon its offices and will be overthrown.

Sometime Race contributor Ryan Mauro illuminates things…

Reports of shots being fired in Tehran, at least one dead. Widespread use of beanbag bullets and tear gas. At least 100,000 people marching in Tehran alone. If they march on the government offices, this regime could fall in 24-48 hours. But will they? And more importantly, will the security forces massacre them or look into the eyes of the Iranians, notice they look like their own sons and daughters, and change sides or at least become neutral?

Cross your fingers…

It’s also been reported by some Twittering protesters that shop owners across the country, and especially Tehran, are going to go on strike tomorrow.

The spectre of Tiananmen Square haunts — but what was that, proportionately? One million Chinese out of hundreds of millions. Iran is a nation of roughly seventy million people. If it is true that one million Iranians are on the streets, that’s the equivalent of five million Americans descending upon Washington, D.C.

There is no more more compelling evidence that the MSM is a rotting, fetid corpse than its (non) coverage of the Iranian Green Revolution currently underway.

At the age of sixteen, I remember taking several extended breaks from my job as a clerk in a local drug store to watch the live non-stop network coverage of the military coup which, eventually, led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

As I survey the different news networks: Fox News, CNN, CNN Headline News, and MSNBC, not a single one is discussing what is, perhaps, the biggest development in U.S. Foreign relations since the Berlin Wall fell.

The MSM is now utterly useless to our society. Has there ever been a greater media failure than this?

Kansas Senator Sam Brownback’s main hurdle to the governor’s office is gone.  Long-time Republican Secretary of State Ron Thornburgh is no longer seeking the Republican nomination for governor.  Thornburgh will not seek re-election, either, which means that nationally-recognized immigration expert and former White House Fellow Kris Kobach (Ko’bock) will have only one main opponent for the Secretary of State’s race.

In a pre-emptive strike against the remarks, “What does this have to do with 2012?”:  if 2010 works as planned for Brownback and Kobach, it’s likely that both of these guys will become household names within a short time.  Brownback will be a leading choice for Vice President, Attorney General, or Supreme Court.

______________________________________________________________

Benjamin Hodge co-owns the Web site KansasProgress.com, based in Johnson County, KS, in the Greater Kansas City area.  You can contact Hodge on Facebook, through his Web site, and on Twitter.

Look at that in Tehran!

Khamenei has officially said that there will be an election inquiry.

Too late, bastard.

By the way, the American media’s role in covering this has been abysmal. Ironically, it’s Andrew Sullivan who’s doing the best job of things.

Rasmussen Health Care Survey

Would it be a good idea to set up a government health insurance company to compete with private health insurance companies?

• 41% Yes
• 41% No

Who is likely to provide better service and more choice—a health insurance company set up by the government or a private health insurance company?

• 34% Health insurance company set up by the government
• 49% Private health insurance company

Suppose a public health insurance company is set up to compete with private health insurance companies. How likely is it that the public health insurance company would lose money and require taxpayer subsidies to stay in business?

• 38% Very likely
• 25% Somewhat likely
• 15% Not very likely
• 5% Not at all likely

If private insurance companies have to compete with a public option, will it reduce the cost of health care?

• 32% Yes
• 40% No

Survey of 1,000 adults was conducted June 12-13. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points.

Inside the numbers:

Sixty-one percent (61%) of Democrats favor the idea while 67% of Republicans are opposed. Those not affiliated with either major party are evenly divided.

Half (50%) of the nation’s Democrats believe the public-sector competition will reduce the cost of health care. Most Republicans and a solid plurality of unaffiliateds disagree.

I will update this as I see fit…check the comments section for Aron Goldman’s own linkfest.

—-

Join the cyber war against the regime! Much of the hardliners’ news websites have already been shut down! Little ways like that are how you can help!

http://twitter.com/Bahram81 sez: Washington Post explain;its poll which estimated Ahmadinejad’s chance2to1 was be4 mousavi announced running, 45%did not answer #iranelection

Why does CNN’s coverage suck so much?

Merkel condemns Iran vote.

Militia fires on rally, one dies

Obama’s failing during this moment

Michael Ledeen: Still silence from the White House and Foggy Bottom.  This is the most cowardly, immoral non-reaction I can remember.  I resigned from my job at the State Dept back in 81 when I thought we were appeasing the Soviets’ repression of Poland, but this is much worse…

Iran can no longer suppress its youth. (Oh, and don’t forget — 2/3 of the population is under 25!)

PARODY: Ahmadinejad says huge crowds are for “Iran’s Got Talent”!

Bahram81 on Twitter: Eyewitness acount; Tehran empty of riot police&uniformed armed forces, ppl control the city, plain-cloths militia mixing in #iranelection

Revolution!

Hundreds of thousands defy regime!

Protesters called on security forces to join them. “Law enforcers, support us, support us!” they shouted, especially when a police vehicle passed by. “You are green like us!”

Death to the dictator!

A tipping point in Iranian resistance!

All of them breaking the law, defying the ban placed by the government! Simply breathtaking!

there are thousands of people (500,000 to more than 1m) in Tehran rally against coup in Iran #iranelection #Tehran #Mousavi

rumor has it, gov might want to demonstrate its power by calling its own rally in the next days #iranelection

State TV right now: rally is illegal and Police will use iron fist against law breakers

You know what i say? “For the first time in my adult life, i’m proud of my country” #iranelection

I usually avoid double-dipping , but I also blog occasionally at Conservatives4Palin.com, and the people over there are doing a webathon this week to help Gov. Palin retire the legal debt from the truckloads of frivolous ethics complaints which have been hurled at her by left-wing activists. Personally, I don’t care what you think of Palin herself, it is absolutely unacceptable to sit back and watch as a prominent political figure is subjected to a concerted effort to personally bankrupt her. The people filing complaints about snowmachines and hockey sticks are the some of the lowest scum inhabiting today’s political scene, and I think that we are obligated as Americans  (regardless of politics) to help Sarah fight them off. If you have a problem with her views, fine, but we should be debating the issues rather than engaging in acts of personal sabotage.

So, please head over to C4P and  follow their donation instructions. The goal is to get a half million dollars donated to the Alaska Fund Trust (Palin’s legal defense fund), and I think that is a very achievable goal. This is also the first real attempt at an independently operated “money bomb” in the conservative blogosphere, so it is a good chance to show just how much power the internet has. Let’s get to work!

What I find so interesting about the latest revolution in Iran is that the folks who I’d expect to be cheering this on — prominent Republicans and conservatives given the trajectory the party took during the Bush years — are those who are acting the most skeptical or even sanguine regarding what could be the fall of the Berlin Wall for our generation. The American Right cheered when Communism collapsed with not a bang but a whimper, and yet it’s the NeoLiberal set, not Conservatives, who are expressing solidarity with the Iranians on the ground who hope to overthrow a nuclear-powered Islamo-fascist government. Andrew Sullivan has been following the situation intensely. Here’s an email he received citing the situation on the ground:

I just talked to my relatives in Tehran. The atmosphere is just like in 1978-79. Sporadic demonstrations continue throughout the city with tires and other objects burning in the streets to dissipate the tear gas. People have left their houses’ doors unlocked for demonstrators to have a safe haven to escape when the riot police attacks them. The solidarity and unity of the people is amazing. Luckily, Mousavi and Karoobi have both asked people to continue their peaceful opposition to the massive rigging of their votes. The regime has made a strategic mistake as it appears that people this time are not going to relent.

And Thomas Friedman, a NeoLiberal’s NeoLiberal, credits this development to President Bush:

There are a million things to hate about President Bush’s costly and wrenching wars. But the fact is, in ousting Saddam in Iraq in 2003 and mobilizing the U.N. to push Syria out of Lebanon in 2005, he opened space for real democratic politics that had not existed in Iraq or Lebanon for decades. “Bush had a simple idea, that the Arabs could be democratic, and at that particular moment simple ideas were what was needed, even if he was disingenuous,” said Michael Young, the opinion editor of The Beirut Daily Star. “It was bolstered by the presence of a U.S. Army in the center of the Middle East. It created a sense that change was possible, that things did not always have to be as they were.”

When I reported from Beirut in the 1970s and 1980s, I covered coups and wars. I never once stayed up late waiting for an election result. Elections in the Arab world were a joke — literally. They used to tell this story about Syria’s president, Hafez al-Assad. After a Syrian election, an aide came in and told Assad: “Mr. President, you won 99.8 percent of the votes. It means that only two-tenths of one percent of Syrians didn’t vote for you. What more could ask for?”

Assad answered: “Their names!”

Lebanese, by contrast, just waited up all night for their election results — no one knew what they’d be.

And now that’s what the Iranians want too.

Meanwhile, the Right is acting far less enthralled with these developments. Here’s Max Boot:

On the principle of “the worse the better” for our enemies–and, make no mistake, Iran is our enemy–it is possible to take some small degree of satisfaction from the outcome of Iran’s elections.

If the mullahs were really canny, they would have let Mousavi win. He would have presented a more reasonable face to the world without changing the grim underlying realities of Iran’s regime–the oppression, the support for terrorism, the nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. He is the kind of “moderate” with whom the Obama administration could happily engage in endless negotiations which probably would not accomplish anything except to buy time for Iran to weaponize its fissile material.

But instead it appears that the mullahocracy was determined to anoint Ahmadinejad the winner–and by a margin which no one can take seriously as a true representation of Iranian popular will. Ahmadinejad is about the worst spokesman possible to make Iran’s case to the West–a president who denies the Holocaust, calls for Israel’s eradication, claims there are no homosexuals in Iran, and generally comes off like a denizen of an alternative universe. Even the Obama administration will be hard put to enter into serious negotiations with Ahmadinejad, especially when his scant credibility has been undermined by these utterly fraudulent elections and the resulting street protests.

That doesn’t mean that Obama won’t try–but he will have a lot less patience with Ahmadinejad than he would have had with Mousavi. And that in turn means there is a greater probability that eventually Obama may do something serious to stop the Iranian nuclear program–whether by embargoing Iranian refined-petroleum imports or by tacitly giving the go-ahead to Israel to attack its nuclear installations.

Harumph, harumph! So the American Right is now pro-Ahmadinejad? And here’s everyone’s favorite once and future presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, from this week’s episode of, er, This Week:

You know, I can’t tell you what led to the people running into the streets in Iran. I hope, in fact, that they’re very anxious to see new leadership in that country. But I can tell you that the results are what I’m interested in. Is Iran still pursuing nuclear weaponry? And there’s no question about at.

And one aspect of what the president said may have been well received in Iran, but I think it was poorly received in Israel and around the world. And that’s when — well, actually, he made a 180- degree flip from what he had said during the campaign. During the campaign, when he spoke to AIPAC, he said he would do everything in his power to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon. And then he went to Cairo and said that no single nation should have the ability to deny another nation the right to have a nuclear weapon. That is an 180-degree flip of a dangerous nature. I’m sure it was welcome in many streets in the Arab world and in the world that’s most — include the Persian world, Iran as well. But that’s not right for America. That’s not right for world security.

Hat tip to reader Flip Dixon for posting that quote on the site earlier today.

Memo to Boot and Romney: when scores of people are taking to the streets and risking their lives in an unfriendly country to make the country MORE Western and MORE friendly to the US, you don’t antagonize them by dismissing them or implying that they are collectively your enemy. So what’s happened to the Right post-Bush? Was the marriage between Conservatives and NeoLiberals during the Bush years simply one of convenience? Are Republicans moving towards a more nationalist, isolationist, to-hell-with-them hawishness, leaving Democrats to be the internationalists and nation builders again? Or are Republicans simply afraid that Iran might be taken off the table as a campaign issue, cynically preferring Iranians to suffer under Ahmadinejad than having to come up with actual new ideas for a brave new world? I’d like to think that latter view is a bridge too far for even today’s Republican Party, but given the sorry state of the GOP, anything’s possible I suppose. As for me, nothing would make me happier than to see the three-decade-long rule of the mullahs come to a close in Iran as Ahmadinejad and his goons are deposed by a popular revolution made possible by our new friends and allies, the Iranian people.