Christmas Lights, Phase 1

The Wreath for Christmas 2006:

Phase one complete:

Explaining The Election

My Potomac News column from last week. But my column did not explain the election, so much as commented that whatever the explanation, the Democrat leadership didn't get it:

Everybody wants to explain the election. What I want to do is complain about toilets. A while ago, the federal government decided we needed to save resources, so they mandated that toilets use less water when flushing. This saved very little water, because most of the toilets rushed to market to meet this mandate wouldn't actually flush with the small amount of water dictated by Washington.

This means that when you want what's in the toilet to end up not in the toilet, you have to flush several times. It also means having plungers in each bathroom, for when what was in the toilet doesn't quite make it out of the toilet. This clogs the pipes, preventing the next flush from removing anything. Usually this is accompanied by screams of "the toilet is going to overflow," and people rushing around trying to find extra provisions before the ensuing flood.

Well, voters didn't like what was in Washington, so we flushed the toilet. But just like the government-mandated atrocities installed in our homes, what was in the toilet (corruption, overspending, earmarks, and petty partisanship) did not actually end up out of the toilet. Instead, it's still floating around, waiting for the next flush to overflow the bowl.

We give the government too much power, so there is too much incentive for unions, lobbyists, businesses, and special-interest organizations to pay for influence over our elected officials. And while this election flushed some corrupt politicians, there are plenty left who will now be given positions of power.

Am I judging too harshly? It's still early, but signs are not good. Nancy Pelosi, who will be the next Speaker of the House, is already hard at work populating the leadership with corrupt members of her own party.

Pelosi endorsed John Murtha for House Majority Leader, snubbing Steny Hoyer of Maryland. Hoyer ran against Pelosi for Minority Leader, and she's never forgiven him for his "disloyalty." Murtha supported her, and its payback time.

The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has Murtha on their list of the most corrupt members in Congress. While many Republicans on the list resigned or were defeated in this election, no Democrats on the list lost their jobs.

Chastising Pelosi for her endorsement of Murtha, CREW director Melanie Sloan says "Pelosi's endorsement of Rep. Murtha, one of the most unethical members of Congress, shows that she may have prioritized ethics reform merely to win votes with no real commitment to changing the culture of corruption." Meanwhile, the Washington Post says Murtha has "worked to slow the ethics process to a crawl for much of the past two years," and called him the "Democratic Party's consummate dealer in home-district spending." So the King of Pork could now be Majority Leader.

Pelosi is also seeking revenge against Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the critically important, bipartisan Intelligence Committee. Traditionally, this committee is staffed with less-partisan politicians, and run without regard to party politics, for the security of the country. But Pelosi is upset that Harman has not used the committee for partisan attacks. So, under pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus, Pelosi might appoint Alcee Hastings in the sensitive position.

Hastings is one of only six [ed note: actually 7] judges in history to be impeached, for bribery. He was removed from office by the Democrat-led Senate in 1989. As a congressman, he hired his girlfriend, whom he owed a half-million dollars for legal fees defending the bribery charges, at a taxpayer-funded salary of $129,000 a year. He is under investigation by the Florida and Federal Elections commissions, and the House Ethics Committee.

Hastings is already in the upper ranks of Democratic leadership, but appointing him Chair of the House Intelligence Committee would be a slap in the face of an electorate who voted in part against the corruption of Washington. Pressure from the media might convince Pelosi to abandon Hastings, but she will still deny Harman the seat.

Using leadership positions to reward political cronies and punish adversaries, and giving the “King of Pork” the leadership position, is probably not what voters had in mind. Seems we might need a few more “flushes” before the job is done.

Of course, as I noted in a previous post, Steny Hoyer is no boy scout when it comes to pork and connections with lobbyists.

Maybe the Mainstream Media is simply populated by Morons.

What else can you make of this UPI story, reported with a matter-of-factness that belies the ludicrous nature of the "facts" being reported:

Michigan teen creates nuclear fusion

ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich., Nov. 19 (UPI) -- An ambitious teenager in Rochester Hills, Mich., is ranked as the 18th amateur in the world to create nuclear fusion -- combining atoms to create energy.

The Detroit Free Press reported that 17-year-old Thiago Olson set up a machine in his parents' garage and has been working exhaustively for more than two years. His machine creates nuclear fusion on a small scale.

Nuclear fusion is "kind of like the holy grail of physics," Olson told the Free Press.
Olson's machine consists of a vacuum that sucks air out, and then deuterium -- a form of hydrogen -- is injected into the vacuum. He then charges electricity into the vacuum, causing the atoms in the center to be attracted to one another, creating nuclear fusion.

Olson -- who wants to work for the federal government, as his grandfather did -- is an otherwise typical teen, the newspaper said. He is on the track team at Stoney Creek High School and plans to go to college.

Hey, at least he isn't running a meth lab.

Dems Reject Murtha, But Steny Hoyer is no Boy Scout

The Netroots are rather upset with the treatment their hero, John Murtha, received from the Democrat party establishment. They have a right to be, especially if John wasn't just lying when he told Chris Matthews that he had enough commitments to win the election for Majority Leader.

Anyway, the Nation notes Steny Hoyer's ties to the same corporate lobbyists for which the democrats castigated republicans last election cycle:

The Nation -- Of course, House Democrats made a mistake in choosing the slick favorite of Washington special interests, Steny Hoyer, over shambling populist John Murtha to serve as House Majority Leader. In one of the more ridiculous exercises of journalistic irresponsibility by a Washington press corps that is distinguished by nothing so much as its ineptness when it comes to offering useful perspective to the American people, Murtha was dismissed as an ethically-challenged mess of a man while Hoyer, the candidate of K. Street, was presented as the tidier Democrat.
...
While Murtha may be an imperfect individual, Hoyers imperfections are systemic. The Marylander who served as minority whip before the election is the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the insider Democrats of Washington: He votes right on just enough issues to keep in the good graces of Democratic special-interest groups. But he votes wrong on just enough economic issues to keep the doors of corporate America open to his fund-raising appeals. The sly strategy has worked for Hoyer -- Public Citizen rated the Maryland congressman as the "most dependent on special-interest money" in the House and ranked him fifth out of the 433 members reviewed for contributions received from lobbyists.

One advantage of Democrat leadership is to remind the American people that the problem in Washington isn't the Republicans, or the Democrats, but Washington itself. We have given the government too much power, and that power forces "monied interests" to spend their money to protect themselves from that power. Some realise they can benefit from the unrestrained use of government power against their economic adversaries. Politicians realise they can "be powerful" if they play along, and at the same time can more easily win re-election because of the increased campaign contributions they can receive both for themselves and their buddies.

Steny Hoyer plays the game very well, helping many of his colleagues get perks, power, and campaign loot. In return, they gave him their vote when it mattered, making him majority leader in direct opposition to their Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. The media may now downplay that outcome, but when was the last time the Speaker of the House was not granted their choice of leadership when they asked for it?

The problem for Democrats is the same as for Republicans -- the ones with seniority are by and large corrupted by their time there, and most "principled" representatives don't stick around long enough either by choice or because the people with money (that includes labor unions and special interest groups along with businesses) will look for "better" representation for those who don't play along.

I count Frank Wolf among those who are better in that regard than most, but even with his years of service nobody's talking about him for any leadership positions.

Class Warfare, Democrat Style.

The AP via Drudge reports an embarrasing moment for John Edwards, where his staff is off trying to get him special access to a Playstation 3 from Walmart at the same time that Edwards is denouncing Walmart as the epitome of evil. From Edwards acknowledges staff asked Wal-Mart for Playstation 3:

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards acknowledged Thursday that amid his criticism of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., a volunteer member of his staff asked the world's largest retailer for help obtaining a hot new Sony Playstation 3 for Edwards' family.
...
"My wife, Elizabeth, wanted to get a Playstation3 for my young children. She mentioned it in front of one of my staff people. That staff person mentioned it in front of a volunteer who said he would make an effort to get one. He was making an effort to go get one for himself," Edwards said.
...
Edwards, the Democrats' vice-presidential candidate in 2004, spoke Wednesday to supporters of union-backed WakeUpWalMart.com on a conference call launching the group's holiday season campaign to pressure Wal-Mart for better labor standards.

In the call, he repeated a story about his son Jack disapproving of a classmate buying sneakers at Wal-Mart.

"If a 6-year-old can figure it out, America can definitely figure this out," Edwards said.
Previously, Edwards has appeared at WakeUpWalMart rallies.

Edwards said the volunteer was "a young kid" unaware of what he called flawed Wal-Mart policies. He called the Wal-Mart statement an effort to divert attention from its own problems.

The funniest part of the story is the juxtaposition of those last two paragraphs. First, Edwards claims a 6-year-old can see how evil Walmart is. Then he says his staff volunteer (presumably much older and wiser than a 6-year-old) is too ignorant to know better.

But in the midst of this humorous story is a seriously sad, sick fact:

In the call, he repeated a story about his son Jack disapproving of a classmate buying sneakers at Wal-Mart.

There is no way a 6-year-old has studied the issues enough to independently come to the conclusion that it would be wrong to shop at Walmart. This is just his parents teaching him to be an elitist snob. But worse, this 6-year-old is ridiculing other SIX YEAR OLDS for their shoes.

First, what 6-year-old "buys" their own sneakers? Obviously the kids PARENTS were the ones who shopped at Walmart, so "Jack" is not only being rude and obnoxious, he is also attacking the WRONG PERSON.

And how does John or Jack know whether the parent's were shopping at Walmart because they had no choice? Not everybody is a rich millionare who can buy shoes at an expensive store. Edwards is showing typical elitist, class-conscious snobbery, and teaching it to his children.

Now they tell us (Media Bias to mislead voters)

Now that the media has succeeded in getting James Webb elected Senator from Virginia, mostly on the strength of a month of "macaca" stories and the implication that the Allen campaign horribly mistreated a Webb campaign staffer, they feel like they can finally tell us the truth that they certainly knew since the beginning.

From the Scripps Howard News Service, quoting from a Sunday Washington Post story:

In this past Sunday's Washington Post, looking back on an experience he said he would not wish on anyone, Sidarth wrote: "Everywhere I went, though I was identifiably working on behalf of Allen's opponent, people treated me with dignity, respect and kindness. I cannot recall one event where food was served and I was not invited to join in the meal."

The following day, he went on, "even after Allen's comments had highlighted my outsider status, I was not allowed to depart without eating ..." And, he said, Allen's staff gave him accurate directions to the senator's next campaign event.

All else aside, this speaks highly of Allen and Sidarth's fellow Virginians. There was more than just one winner in that campaign.

What do you know. Allen's campaign wasn't spiteful, or hateful. Allen's supporters weren't racist hicks who saw only a "strange" person not like them. They didn't treat him mean, and contrary to the idea that Allen saw Sidarth as some opponent to be vilified, he and his campaign saw him as a person to be treated with dignity and respect.

Do you think a front-page Washington Post article in the week after the macaca incident which explained to Virginians how Allen and the campaign REALLY treated Sidarth would have been worth 10,000 votes? I think so. And I think they thought so to. Which is why you didn't read this story until AFTER the election was over.

It's one thing to agressively pursue and overreport stupid stories again and again, but to hide the truth from the voters until after the election in order to help your preferred candidate is what a CAMPAIGN does, not what a real news service does.

Which tells you what the Washington Post was for the Webb campaign this year.

Vote for BMW!!!!

I'm not really sure what Cindy Sheehan was selling here, looks like she's got herself a corporate sponsor....




Update: As anon noted, I messed up the punchline. Vote Mercedes!!!!

And now for something Completely Different.

One of my favorite skits from Saturday Night Live:

Abortion's Slippery Slope

In my latest Potomac News column, I get back to issues, which I'm much more comfortable with than writing about candidates for office. In the article, I use two recent news reports to highlight the harm abortion is causing society.

In "Abortion's Slippery Slope", I argue that a British proposal to allow termination of babies born with birth defects is the next logical step for abortionists, which could be extended using their logic to healthy children. And I note that a criminal case pending against abortion clinic staff in Florida is simply the natural outcome of being employed to kill babies.

Potomac News
Thursday, November 9, 2006

Some day, we will look back at abortion as one of the great tragedies of our time. Abortion is a cancer on our society, a gruesome testament to a self-centered age. The lies advanced in support of the killing infect the very core of our culture, and the consequences reach far beyond the genocide of millions of humans of every race, color, and creed.

Two recent stories highlight the profound impact of abortion, revealing a rip in the moral fabric of society that will tear us apart if we do not wake up. A warning: these stories should disgust and sicken you, although possibly some people are already too desensitized by the abortion culture to grasp the horror.

The first is a news report from Florida, where last July "Miami-Dade County police found the badly decomposed body of a baby girl" at an abortion facility. A woman waiting to complete an abortion delivered the baby in the waiting room. For five minutes, the woman "watched her daughter moving and gasping for air."

But the staff did nothing to help the girl. Instead, they took the newborn baby and suffocated her in a plastic bag. Later, the body was "treated with a caustic chemical and left in the heat of the Florida sun to accelerate decomposition in a possible attempt to dispose of the evidence."

How could the medical staff kill the child rather than help her? Well, they are trained to kill babies. Unlike many of their patients, abortion doctors and staff know what they are doing. They know that, for many of the babies they "terminate," they could just as easily be using their training to successfully deliver and save those babies. Their actions hinge only on whether the mother decides to let the baby live or not.

So it was no stretch for the abortion clinic staff to finish the job they started, even though the baby was already born, and the mother expressed no interest in having the pregnancy "terminated," having seen her child and realized the mistake she had made. The staff just did what they are paid to do.

But a local police deputy knows better, saying "This isn't about a botched abortion; there never was an abortion, and the mother is not the victim … The victim is the baby, and whether that baby had an hour or eight hours' worth of life, she had a right to that."

Meanwhile, a group of doctors in England are pushing for a law to allow killing newborn babies born with birth defects. According to an article in this week's London Sunday Times, the doctors are concerned about the impact disabled children have on families: "active euthanasia" should be considered for the overall good of families, to spare parents the emotional burden and financial hardship of bringing up the sickest babies."

Highlighting the relationship between their proposal and the abortion of babies up to the moment of birth, the study says "If life-shortening and deliberate interventions to kill infants were available, they might have an impact on obstetric decision-making, even preventing some late abortions, as some parents would be more confident about continuing a pregnancy and taking a risk on outcome."

In other words, if parents could have the babies killed after they are born, they might not kill them before birth. If the doctors succeed in their quest, their argument will be extended to healthy babies, as the "logic" is not restricted to the disabled. A mother can abort her baby at any time for almost any reason. What if a mother isn't sure she wants her child? Rather than making her "choose" before birth, offer a "grace period." She can spend a few days with the newborn, and make an "informed" decision to keep her baby, or have it killed, just as these doctors would do with disabled children.

I know that is sick, but that's where abortion-on-demand has taken us. Once we accept the concept of killing unwanted or unhealthy pre-born children, all we are arguing about is at what age children gain their right to "humanity." Most people still cringe when mothers kill their newborn children, but it's just a matter of time before no life is safe from those for whom "quality of life" is a euphemism for "killing those we find inconvenient."

Vote Yes for Marriage -- Its For The Children

Just a reminder to get out and vote, and vote YES on the Virginia Marriage Amendment.




One Man, One Woman -- the way Nature Intended

Someone Stole the Republican Signs from 234 Bypass

I spent the day putting up signs. I was very encouraged that all the major intersections on 234 bypass by my house were well-covered already, with more than a dozen signs at each of 3 intersections. So I was able to cover some less-travelled roads.

I was out at 2pm today.

Well, tonight I thought I'd show my daughter, after we put up some more signs, how well the intersections we had done last year were done. I drove out at about 11pm, and EVERY ONE OF OUR SIGNS WAS GONE.

Yes, literally DOZENS of Republican signs were stolen from the 234 bypass, within 24 hours of the election.

I am so pissed off right now. It's a lot of work putting up signs, getting them the proper distance from the road, making sure they are visible. They aren't like phone calls, annoying people.

I noticed that nobody had stolen the random Pandak sign that I saw, only the republican signs. But to be honest, I don't think there were any democrat signs at any of these intersections.

I did see bunches of signs at my polling place for the democrats, our signs haven't been put up yet (I presume someone is doing that in the morning).

Now that I've seen how republican signs get stolen, I understand why we put our signs out right before dawn at the polling places, so there's less opportunity for our signs to be removed. The democrats of course have nothing to fear putting out their signs the evening before.

I guess this is one more example of the win-at-any-cost mentality of the democrats this year. Its the mentality that blocked the republicans from putting the name of their candidate on a ballot in Texas, which might lead to a democrat who has less than 35% of the vote in polls winning the election.

BTW, (this is the DeLay race), having blocked Sekula-Gibbs from the regular election (she will win the special election in a landslide, proving that she IS the person the people of the district really want to represent them), the democrats spent a MILLION dollars contacting voters. NOT to get them to vote for Lampson -- they contact REPUBLICANS, and told them to WRITE IN someone who was NOT the republican, although they said he was a "republican".

Yep, they are trying to split the republican vote by spending a MILLION dollars to confuse the people of the district into voting for an independent, which they might get away with because they blocked access to the ballot.

In Florida, they tried to block simple signs telling people at the voting booth that in order to vote for Negron, they should cast a vote for Foley. Can't have an informed electorate -- an educated, informed electorate is a democrat's worst nightmare.

So in Virginia, Webb hides his views, is silent on the issues, and insteads runs a 24/7 smear campaign, aided by the Washington Post which hides the fact that the Webb campaign is behind all the smears (well, the WP does a lot of smearing itself).

In Ohio, two bloggers connected to the campaigns of multiple democrats, (they run the web sites for most of the candidates) are running an infiltration campaign sending democrats to pretend to be republicans to sign up for the GOP GOTV effort. They are given a fake script to annoy the people they call. Another Democrat group is calling republicans from 10pm-3am, tellign them they are doing a survey for the republican candidate and holding them on the phone for up to 10 minutes before hanging up on the people.

Other places (like virginia) there are democrats pretending to be republicans, generating complaints from democrats about "unethical campaign tactics".

Of course, we know about the orchestrated effort in Virginia to deface republican signs -- someone went through the trouble of printing up hundreds of stickers to put on the signs of republican candidates.

Oh well, tomorrow it will all be over. If the republicans manage to hold the house, I will take particular glee in it all.

Why you should vote for Allen. John Warner Agrees

Corey Stewart will Protect Homeowners, Citizens of Prince William County

Here's a copy of my column that ran Saturday in the Potomac News:

Critically Thinking
By Charles Reichley
November 4, 2006

On November 7, we choose a new Chair for the Prince William County Board of Supervisors. Republican Sean Connaughton did a great job, but now we face new challenges. Taxes have increased faster than income. Overdevelopment strains our schools, roads, and resources. The board has just started standing up to excessive development.

We need a Chair who will lead that fight. We need a chair with legislative experience, not experience doing what clients want. Corey Stewart has that experience, and Sharon Pandak does not. Corey will fight to control development, protect property owners, and reign in the excessive growth of government.

I’ve watched Prince William grow from a quiet town to a bustling population center, and suffered as we all have with overcrowd schools, traffic gridlock not just for commuters but simply driving across town, and ever-increasing tax assessments as the county pays for problems caused by overdevelopment.

Corey Stewart has been fighting much of the development that plagues us. People have a right to use their property, but government’s duty is to protect the rights of existing property owners as well. For too long all of us have paid the price while a few benefited. Corey will make development pay its fair share. Corey will work with local legislators to change State law, giving us the power to control development while protecting the rights of property owners.

Corey has led the fight against excessive growth in local government. The Chair directs county staff to prepare a budget based on expected revenue. Corey will request the staff to prioritize spending limiting property tax increases to the rate of inflation. This will give the board the information needed to control spending and make informed choices.

Pandak’s record contains disturbing warnings for property owners. As county attorney, her idea to control government spending was to underpay owners for their property. When government takes your land, it has to pay “fair market value”. People trusted the county, and Sharon abused that trust.

As the Washington Post reported in 1991, the county was “buying rights of way at bargain prices”. Rather than offer the county-appraised value, Pandak’s office would often “begin negotiating with an offer beneath that price and may refuse access to the appraisal”. Many offers were less than the tax assessment. The county right-of-way agent, Nina Mathews, resigned over the deceptive practice. She says letters Sharon’s office sent were “worded to deceive”, implying offers were the appraised value.

This year, Sharon lobbied against a law keeping the government from taking your land and giving it to developers. She called the effort to protect property owners a “draconian reaction that unreasonably limits use of the condemnation power by localities”. Corey supports the bill, and as Chair will protect homeowners from unreasonable taking of their property, and ensure a fair price is offered.

Corey has the experience and the ideas to move Prince William forward. Prince William needs Corey Stewart for Board Chair.

Senator Allen, Right on the Issues

Here's a copy of my column from October 26 in the Potomac News:

Critically Thinking
By Charles Reichley
October 26, 2006

Senator Allen, Right on the Issues

In the Virginia Senate race, the media has largely avoided discussing real issues. They spent a month on an inappropriate comment by Senator Allen. Then it was 27-year-old attacks on women by James Webb. After that, the religious background of Allen’s mother, and whether Webb was running an anti-Semitic campaign.

Next there were competing rumors about candidates using the N-word when they were in college over three decades ago. Then Webb used the offensive term “Towel-head” in a Washington Post interview. I’ve probably missed some; it’s been hard to keep up.

An opinion columnist in this paper said we should support Webb because Allen is a “putz” (an offensive Yiddish term meaning “Forget the issues, I hate this guy”). He followed up with another column saying he was serious – two columns, not one good word about Webb.

Character matters, of course – but decades-old recollections don’t reveal the character of grown men. Allen has a bevy of well-respected people vouching for him, as well as a 20-year public record of votes, speeches, and conduct proving his good character.

Allen received the endorsement of respected African-Americans who would never support a racist. This includes Portsmouth Mayor James Holley and Bishop Gerald Glenn of Chesterfield, and also Democrat State Senator Benjamin Lambert. Allen is supported by The Latino Coalition, who made their unanimous endorsement after polling 3,500 members in Virginia.

Allen is also endorsed by respected Senators John Warner and John McCain. Yes, they are Republicans. But neither would support Allen if he was not a man of good character. Even James Webb has acknowledged their integrity. The attacks on Senator Allen’s character are unwarranted based on his record and the testimony of those who know him.

But can we discuss issues? There have been three debates, but except for the Iraq war there is almost no media coverage of issues. But on issue after issue, Allen is on the side of Virginians.

Allen is a strong proponent of the tax cuts which have spurred our economy and led to record tax revenues. Over 215,000 jobs have been created in Virginia since the tax cuts were enacted, and average wages have increased about 10% in the past two years. The record shows three million Virginians benefited from those tax cuts.

Webb thinks 99% of us were hurt by the tax cuts. He is on record saying we need more tax revenue. Webb is supported by those in his party who will take away tax cuts which have benefited millions of Virginians and spurred our economic growth.

On trade, Allen is joined by Governor Tim Kaine in supporting free trade policies that benefit Virginia’s seaports, a major employer in our state. Webb told the editorial board of the Virginia-Pilot newspaper that he supports using tariffs to force “fair trade” on our partners. The editors gave this damning assessment of Webb’s position: “Even Webb's backers see that his arguments make no sense for Virginia. Gov. Tim Kaine calls Webb's position a "losing strategy."

Allen has an excellent record on education as Governor. He has sponsored the National Innovation Act, which focuses on improving science and technology education to better equip students and our nation for the challenges of the 21st century. He supports extension of tuition tax credits, another tax cut blocked by the Senate Democrats who support Webb.

Allen supports federal help for local transportation. He has pushed for widening I-66 inside the Beltway and for the I-66/Route 29 interchange project. He’s worked to widen I-95 between Rte. 123 and the Fairfax County parkway. And he’s championed the Dulles Metrorail project.

Senator Allen supports drilling for oil in ANWR, providing a million barrels a day of independence from countries like Venezuela and Iran. Webb opposes ANWR drilling. Allen has a comprehensive policy for energy independence.

Allen supports a minimum wage increase. Allen voted to increase the minimum wage and extend the middle-class tax cuts. Webb says he supports these positions. But his Democrat allies in the Senate blocked the bill; otherwise we would have an increased minimum wage today.

These are issues on which we can decide this election, rather than on cheap personal attacks. And on the issues, Allen is right for Virginia.

James Webb with Chuck Schumer on Judicial Filibusters

According to the organization StopTheACLU, Chuck Schumer has reassured his democrat colleagues that the supposedly "moderate" democrat senate candidates are all on board with the liberal democrats filibusters to oppose mainstream justices who refuse to re-write the constitution.

James Webb, who has claimed to be an "independent" voice, has refused to rule out joining them.

From StopTheAclu:

Casey, Webb, Ford & Tester Agree To Schumer Filibuster Pact
...
Schumer is reported to have assured Democrats that Bob Casey Jr. — despite running as a moderate Senate candidate — would be supportive of Democratic efforts to block constitutionalist judicial nominees. “There’s no worry on judges,” said Schumer. “And judges is the whole ball of wax.” Other supposedly centrist Democratic candidates including Harold Ford Jr. (Tenn.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Jim Webb (Va.) have refused to rule out filibusters against judicial nominees.

This could be very important, because of other rumors circulating about Justice Stevens:

For the past several weeks, there has been a rumor circulating among high-level officials in Washington, D.C., that a member of the U.S. Supreme Court has received grave medical news and will announce his or her retirement by year’s end.

Here's the irony -- the democrats have launched an assault on the judiciary, making it into a political arm of their party after a history of judicial independence (as shown by the fact that, while 7 of the current justices were appointed by republican administrations, that includes some of the most liberal justices, including Justice Stevens himself, along with David Souter -- and also some of the justices the democrats speak highly of, like O'Connor and Kennedy.

But because the justices have become so active in writing laws, some single-issue voters became highly motivated to ensure that justices were picked who would give power back to the people. If it weren't for the Supreme Court picks, I wouldn't be surprised to see social conservatives let the democrats have the senate, but with a judge position on the line, the social conservatives will come out in force.

What does Webb have against a Vibrant Economy?

Unemployment is at 4.4%. Tax revenues to the Federal Government are the highest they have EVER been. And the reason is the tax cuts supported by George Allen, and signed into law in 2003. These are the investment tax cuts, not the "targeted" tax pushed by the democrats in 2001 which did little to help the economy. These are the taxes that the democrats claim only help the "rich" that they want to repeal.

The following chart shows how the tax cuts have turned our economy around, and provided record revenue to the government:


But when the democrats talk about reducing the deficit, they always talk about RAISING taxes, rather than cutting spending, even though the current tax law is bringing in Record Revenue.

Waldo Slimes for Webb, Webb is still Silent

Waldo has a scurrilous piece up at his blog about Allen's ex-wife supposedly accepting too many drinks from some guy she met on an airplane last year. The story continues that, having gotten her pretty drunk, the guy claims she said all sorts of things about her husband.

Mrs. Waddell (Allen's ex-wife, she's remarried) denies the claims. Her statement is here:

Statement of Anne Waddell
October 31, 2006Contact: Press Office703.845.3689
ARLINGTON, VA – Anne Waddell, Senator George Allen’s ex-wife, released the following statement today:
“I am thoroughly disgusted by the baseless allegations and insinuations that have obviously been orchestrated by George’s opponent for the Senate.
“It is not a secret that George and I were once married and divorced over 22 years ago. Because a divorce is a very personal matter, we decided to keep the records sealed, and I believe and insist that this is proper.
“However, George’s opponent is trying to make something more of this matter. And I will not stand for it. George was, and is, a wonderful person and to try to make him into something else is deceitful, wrong, and will surely backfire against Mr. Webb and his allies. These types of last minute, desperate attacks are why so many Americans are disgusted with politics. It is a baseless, cheap shot.
“Let me make it perfectly clear. If I were still a resident of Virginia, I would proudly cast my vote for George Allen.
“I admire him as a person and as a dedicated public servant. Unlike some others in Washington, he is a man of integrity and character who has always been a loyal friend and hard-working elected official.
“I agree with George on so many issues and appreciate the humor and personal charisma with which he approaches adversity.
“George Allen is an outstanding United States Senator. I am proud to call him my friend and I urge Virginians to return him to Washington where he can continue to work for them.”

But to the insane people who support James Webb, not only is Allen a born liar and cheat and racist and bigot, apparently so is his ex-wife, and his mother, and his grandfather, and pretty much every republican who lives in Virginia who is thinking about voting for him.

I'm sick and tired of the Webb campaign dragging people's family members through the mud in their disgusting attempt to win an election that they could never win on the issues or on what is best for Virginia.

I won't link to Waldo's post, you can go find it yourself if you care.

I sent an e-mail to Webb asking him to put a stop to this, but I don't expect him to respond to THIS attack from his supporters any more than he has responded to any other. Webb has shown a remarkable lack of character in this campaign -- not only has he used baseless charges against his opponent and his opponents family, has hasn't even had the common decency to stand up for what he is charging, prefering to hide behind the likes of Lowell Feld and now Waldo.

NY Times admits it messed up Kerry story (it believed Kerry)

In a previous post, I mentioned that Kerry was still lying about what he said. Turns out that the New York Times noticed this as well. See, they believed what Kerry told them, and printed it without checking things themselves. This is what most of the media is doing today for the democrats, which is how the entire national media ran a story about Stark being "assaulted" when in fact Stark was the one doing the assaulting.

Anyway, someone pointed out to the Times that Kerry's words were actually published and were on a tape and it was easy to see the Times and Kerry were lying, so they issued a correction:

"A Political Memo article yesterday about the fallout for Senator John Kerry over what he called a 'botched joke' referred incompletely to the differences between prepared remarks and what he actually said about the Iraq war to students at Pasadena City College in California on Monday. Mr. Kerry not only dropped the word 'us,' but he also rephrased his opening sentence extensively and omitted a reference to President Bush. Mr. Kerry’s aides said that the prepared text read: 'Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush.' What he said: “You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

I don't know if Ragnar will wander back and explain why the New York Times is wrong about their correction or not. But the important thing, something that I hope will be corrected after the election, is that the national and most local news organizations have completely gone into the tank for the democrats this cycle, and are printing hearsay as if it is real news.

If Bush hurts republicans, why is he out while Reid and Pelosi are hiding?

The conventional wisdom is that republicans are hurt by their association with President Bush. And yet the President is out there every day, giving interviews, holding press conference, and making speeches throughout the country. He's not hiding, he's in the forefront making HIS case for why we should elect republicans.

If he was such a detriment, you'd expect him to be hiding, but he's not. But who IS hiding? None other than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Yep, that's right. The leaders of the Democrat party, the people who will lead the house and senate if the American people make the enormous mistake of putting the Democrats back in power, are nowhere to be found. No speeches, not press conferences, no stumping around the country for their candidates. Instead, people like Kerry have been running around, but now he's also been hidden away. The picture of the "radioactive" Bush appearing on stage with republicans while the "saviors of our country" Pelosi and Reid are hidden away in a bunker somewhere, praying that nobody will find them or talk about them or remind anybody what they stand for before the election.

But even the media (which has done everything in it's power to try to get democrats elected), has noticed that they are carrying the water for people who have "cut and run" from their own election cycle.

Drudge notes (and google searches of news confirms) that Pelosi dropped off the radar around October 22 (Reid went into hiding after his explanations of his real estate deal went flat):

The woman who would be speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has oddly stayed out of the national spotlight in the week leading up to the big vote. The high profile, potentially history-making democrat has turned dramatically low-key. The last photo of vanishing Pelosi on the wires was from an October 21 fundraiser.

And since Pelosi appeared on the October 22 broadcast of 60 MINUTES, national TV hits have been nonexistent.

A source close to the congresswoman explains she has been busy behind the scenes. Pelosi made a brief appearance with Bill Clinton this week in San Fransisco.

Senator Chuck Schumer explained to reporters a month ago that the last thing the Democrats wanted to do was to raise issues in this election, because it might help Republicans if people knew what the Democrats wanted to do. Democrats cringe when the occasional media outlet notes who will run the committees should the democrats take over.

The Washington Post, trying to be helpful, even ran a story suggesting that maybe Nancy Pelosi wouldn't even BE the speaker of the House if the democrats won. That's how afraid the democrats are about people finding out what is behind the curtain.

The Washington Times profiled Pelosi's voting record here. It's not something Virginian's would support, but if enough Virginians pull the wrong lever, or push the wrong button, it won't be Webb or Kellum or Feder or Hurst running the Democrat party in a "new direction", it will be Nancy Pelosi and her liberal approach to government.

One thing is certain. Pelosi won't be hiding AFTER the election. Democrats hide what they believe until they have power, but they aren't bashful about hypocrisy. Tim Kaine took less than a week to break a major campaign promise about taxes, and didn't bat an eyebrow when he dropped his "lock the transportation trust fund" pledge. Nor did reversing his stance on the marriage amendment should be a cause for embarrassment.

Vote Yes for Marriage -- New Jersey voters want to now.

Vote Yes on the Marriage amendment. Don't wait for a court to force our state to recognize gay marriage or implement it ourselves before we act.

The people of New Jersey were complacent about a marriage amendment back in the spring, because they didn't think there was any rush, and they didn't see the danger.

Now a court has forced them to implement marriage by some name, and belatedly the people realise they need a marriage amendment. But by the time they implement it, they will have had gay marriages legalized for months if not years, against the will of the people.

We have an opportunity to act BEFORE the courts can force gay marriage on our state against the will of the people. Let's not blow it because supporters of gay marriage are deceiving people with tall tales of false threats to existing laws and contracts.


From the imapp:

NJ Poll: Majority Reject Gay Marriage

The Eagleton-Rutgers poll of 809 New Jersey adults was taken Oct. 29-31. Margin of eror 3.5 percent. The results are dramatically different from a widely touted June New Jersey poll suggesting majorities favored gay marriage.

...

Most dramatically, New Jerseyans now support a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of husband and wife: 54 percent to 38 percent.

NYTimes Confirms Saddam had Detailed Nuke Weapon Plans!!!!!

What about a November Surprise. The New York Times has a story that, hidden in the thousands of pages of documents from Saddam's regime which have yet to be translated, there are documents showing Iraq had detailed, working plans for nuclear weapons, good enough that the IAEA is worried that the declassification and posting could materially advance Iran's program.

From National Review Online:

Shocker: New York Times Confirms Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Program

(from drudge):

NYT REPORTING FRIDAY, SOURCES SAY: Federal government set up Web site — Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal — to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war; detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research; a 'basic guide to building an atom bomb'... Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency fear the information could help Iran develop nuclear arms... contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that the nuclear experts say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums...

I'm sorry, did the New York Times just put on the front page that IRAQ HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND WAS PLOTTING TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB?

What? Wait a minute. The entire mantra of the war critics has been "no WMDs, no WMDs, no threat, no threat", for the past three years solid. Now we're being told that the Bush administration erred by making public information that could help any nation build an atomic bomb.

Let's go back and clarify: IRAQ HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS PLANS SO ADVANCED AND DETAILED THAT ANY COUNTRY COULD HAVE USED THEM.

As Drudge notes, the web site is now shut down, and rightly so. One of the mistakes the Bush Administration made in my opinion was not getting more translaters to dig through these documents to FIND the evidence and shut down the critics of the war.

I understand that proving that Iraq had a weapons program doesn't help us solve the problems we NOW face, and that's why Bush has focused on what lies ahead and not what came behind.

But Bush underestimated the hatred from the left, and their willingness to sabatoge the war effort for their own power. He didn't believe that people elected to serve their country would instead undermine it, so he couldn't understand the value in digging out proof of what he always knew was true, and that no longer mattered.

Unfortunately, that was EXACTLY what we needed to win the war on terror, because without that otherwise wasted effort, we are stuck with John Kerry using our troops as foils for a political joke, for democrats lying about the war, exposing our secrets, and undermining the morale of the troops and the support at home in order to exact political revenge against Bush.

I am glad that the documents were made public, although I'm also happy that they have been taken offline now that we know there's important stuff there. Maybe now we can get some money to really translate these. In the interim, bloggers have been sacrificing their own time to translate the documents.

They have found evidence of Saddam trying to contribute pilots to a "plot" which was supposed to attack the U.S. sometime in 2001, which could well have been 9/11 or the suspected follow-up attack.

They have found documents detailing cheating on weapons inspections, on hiding weapons and weapons components, of transfering weapons around the country and burying them in deserts, and a lot of other things that puts the lie to the democrat spin that Saddam was no danger to us.

Unfortunately, the New York Times waited too long for this to help republicans. This story should have been put out weeks ago, but they were too busy with Foley this and Foley that. Anyway, why would the NYTimes do anything to help the "evil" republicans?

I hope that in the two days left, we can get word out. Fortunately, the democrats should help us, because they will see the danger the story puts them in. I expect they will try to spin this as a "failure" by Bush to "protect our secrets", which would be hilarious given their leaking of classified information left and right. Somehow, they will try to make proof of Saddam's Nuclear Program as a "failure" of the administration to protect us, even though it was the administration that pushed for approval to fight the war that stopped Saddam from being able to develop these weapons himself.

In any case, win or lose, it's good for the world that Saddam isn't still in power. Monday he should be found guilty of a few of his crimes, another event the Democrats will want to hide from the public.

UPDATE: A little more from the actual New York Times article, this from Stop The ACLU:

The New Yorks times confirms that in 2002 Saddam Hussein’s “scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away:”

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990’s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

Had the United States not eliminated this threat, today we would be facing a nuclear armed Iraq and possibly a nuclear armed Iran.

Well, after years of listening to Democrats ridiculing the administration about "mushroom clouds" and "false claims of WMD programs", the New York Times, the liberal's paper of record, now says Saddam might have been within a YEAR of having a bomb in 2002.

Thank GOD for President Bush. Maybe I will have to thank God that I was not President, because I opposed the war.

Jeff Frederick: why we should elect Corey Stewart

I missed Jeff's letter in the Potomac News, they've been running lots of letters every day. But he e-mailed it to his supporters, so I'm reproducing it here.

Jeff is absolutely right that the person who spent 15 years telling the board what it couldn't do to stop development, and then went to work for the developers (including lobbying to stop passage of the takings bill which would protect us from having government take our land and give it to their developer friends), is certainly not the person to put in charge of the board if you want to stop the developers from running roughshod over our county.

Anyway, Here's the letter: I'm not putting it in a little block, because it's easier to read in full:


From Jeff Frederick (bold highlighting is mine, not his):

I'm often told by members of our Board of Supervisors that they can't vote no to new development because their lawyer told them they can't. Putting aside the fact that these elected officials don't work for their attorneys, but rather, for the people that elected them, the lawyer these Supervisors speak of is none other than Sharon Pandak. I find it humorous that the local Democratic party believes their nominee for Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is the best person to slow and better manage growth in Prince William when it is Ms. Pandak who is among those most responsible for the out-of-control growth we've experienced here.

What's more is Ms. Pandak's little secret: when she left her job as County Attorney, she entered private practice as a land-use attorney. Translated: a lawyer who gets paid big bucks from builders and developers to get their projects approved by the Board of Supervisors (using her contacts made during her tenure with the County). In both public and private life, Ms. Pandak has made a career out of making sure builders and developers have their way in Prince William by building, building, and... yes, more building.

Contrast all this to Supervisor Corey Stewart. Since he was elected, combating growth and fighting against an explosion in the property taxes our hardworking families pay have been his top priorities. Time and time again, Mr. Stewart has stood firm against the builder/developer special-interest lobby and opposed project after project. He has also used his vote on the Board -- every year he's been in office -- to oppose the double-digit increases in property taxes. His record is clear.

Ms. Pandak's record is also clear, even now. One only needs to look at whom she is accepting her political contributions from to know where she stands on the issues. Thousands of dollars, by the day, are flying into her campaign bank account from the very big developers and builders that pay her salary. Don't be fooled by her convenient election-season flip-flops. Check the facts.

The way I see it, the two biggest challenges facing Prince William County are growth/development, and skyrocketing property taxes. In the race for Chairman, only one candidate has a proven record in confronting both of those problems: Corey Stewart. I hope you'll join me in supporting him on November 7th.

Jeff FrederickMember, House of Delegates52nd District

Proof Stark phyiscally attacked Allen supporters

Stark has been claiming he simply was asking a question. The liberal media took his word for it, just as they take the word of anything Webb supporters and campaign staff say without question (like the lie that Sidarth was the only minority at the Breaks event).

Anyway, Ben T over at NotLarrySabato has been pushing the story that Stark was mistreated by Allen campaigners, and many of his contributers have made a big deal out of the "thuggery".

Now that the proof is out, Ben is backtracking {ED NOTE: See below for retraction} , hoping to salvage whatever is left of his once-deserved integrity that he has lost floating fake polls and rediculous charges.

Here's the "video" showing Stark attacking an Allen supporter at the event, BEFORE several Allen supporters finally showed him the door. You can see Stark has his left hand on the guy's arm, and his right hand pushing the guy in the chest. Then you can see him push the guy out of the way, and finally elbow him before looking back to see his handiwork.



UPDATE: Ben comments that he feels characterizing his statements as "backtracking" is misleading because he never gave a different point of view. I think I can live with that, so I withdraw my "backtracking" comment. However, I feel "pushing" the story is a valid comment because he did post more than one thread on his web site, and claimed the guy was "assaulted" which I don't believe is accurate given what Stark had done to provoke the reaction.

The comments about Ben's credibility is my opinion, and is not offered as fact. I believe that he is admired by many of his commenters.

After the election is over, we'll see if Ben comes back to what in my opinion would be the reality-based world or not. Both sides will be much better off after this election.

Kerry still lying about what he said.

Kerry has issued a semi-apology, apologizing for any hurt he may have caused, but saying that "hurt" was caused by a "misinterpretation" of his words, rather than admiting that his words themselves were wrong.

But when he was interviewed, he said that he had just gotten ONE word wrong. He then said that he meant to say "they got US stuck in Iraq", but he accidentally said "they got stuck in Iraq".

Except that is not what he said. His exact words were: "you get stuck in Iraq". Not "THEY get stuck". He explicitly said that if you didn't get a good education, YOU get stuck in Iraq.

Anyway, this story should die out now that some of the more SANE democrats have called for Kerry to apologize (Webb is notoriously NOT one of those SANE democrats, in spite of his more sane call for Kerry to apologize two years ago for other remarks Kerry made against the troops).

Kerry has done as much of an apology as the media would require from a democrat; Kerry won't endure 3 weeks of the Washington Post finding individuals to talk about the way his words hurt them.

And they won't bother asking Webb why he didn't seek an apology, but rather defended Kerry's joking about our troops in Iraq.

Larry Sabato says Webb lifted passages for novel

We were all laughing when TC posted a "Did James Web Plagiarize" entry in his blog, and then never provided any information. It turned into a scatalogical humor thread, and we all went on our way.

But it turns out he was correct. Larry Sabato confirms it (from NRO):

Larry Sabato, the University of Virginia professor of politics, has seen 17 passages from Bergamini that resemble passages from Webb. “There are some passages that were lifted, that’s just obvious,” he says, while noting that perhaps Webb has some explanation for the similarity that hasn’t occurred to him. “It could have been taken care of with one line in the author’s note. Even in fiction you have to acknowledge an intellectual debt.”

The book in question is "The Emperor’s General".

The 1999 novel, a work of historical fiction, earned Webb a $1 million advance and $2 million for the film rights (according to Variety). Running the novel through a plagiarism detector available online makes it clear that it cribs dialogue and information from the late David Bergamini’s Japan’s Imperial Conspiracy, a popular history released in 1971. But Webb doesn’t credit Bergamini. You wouldn’t expect footnotes in a novel, but you would expect a reference to source material in an author’s note, in acknowledgments, or in suggestions for further reading. Bergamini doesn’t get a mention anywhere, in either the hardback or paperback versions of Webb’s book.

The article gives a few examples, here is one trivial one:

Bergamini translated Japanese documents for his book; many bits of dialogue taken from those documents would have been unavailable to Webb without Bergamini’s work. Sometimes it’s phrases that were lifted. So, for example, Bergamini refers (paperback, p. 200) to “a buccaneers’ enclave called Karak at the tip of the Korean peninsula.” Webb (paperback, p. 346) refers to “a pirate’s enclave called Karak at the tip of the Korean peninsula.”

Now, Webb is writing fiction, while the book he took the phrases and sentences and ideas from was, it appears, an historical reference. Still, I'm just a hack opinion writer, but when I take a sentence from the Washington Post, I put it in quotes and acknowledge the source.

It is revealing that Webb collecting millions for a book and didn't even acknowledge the extensive work done by someone who was instrumental in some of the passages of his book.

The point is that we know NOTHING about Webb, because the media has IGNORED HIS LIFE. If Webb was a republican, Allen's campaign wouldn't have had to bring up his writings about women, the Washington Post would have run front-page articles about it. The WP would have dug up people to say Webb was hard to work with, that he quit his secretary post after only 10 months.

They would have told us all his flip-flops, all his bizarre beliefs he has expressed over the years. They would have lambasted him for changing his mind about people, for holding a 20-year-grudge. They would have highlighted his temper, they would have ridiculed him for thinking some island in the pacific was important.

They most certainly would have printed all the salacious details of Webb's books. They would have wondered about his "strange love" for Scots, and would have given us profiles of the student he slept with while teaching at the academy. They would also have found every detail about the woman who claims Webb stalked her in the 90s.

But because the Washington Post hates Allen, because Webb is a democrat, they have given him a pass on everything. We have to put up with democrat activists claiming that in a roomful of people they were the ONLY ones to hear Allen use the n-word repeatedly and loudly, but we can't learn about Webb lying about taking the lead in getting billets for women, or for getting an African American on the memorial -- instead, we would have had women quoted complaining about Webb fighting a women's vietnam memorial. His words about how "few" of them served would have been hung around his neck, but he's the left's poster boy, the Washington Post's candidate.

Webb knows NOTHING about Virginia. He doesn't seem to care, and I wouldn't be surprised if he quits the Senate after a year or so. But we can't know about that, because the important thing is that some nut-case assaulted Allen supporters at a private event and had to be restrained (only the media turns it into an attack by Allen himself).

Has Webb returned Kerry's Money Yet?

Democrat Senate Candidates across the country are rightly but belatedly calling for John Kerry to apologize for insulting our soldiers. I haven't seen Webb's call yet, but I'm sure he got the message from the DSCC.

The question is will he return the money Kerry gave him, tainted as it now is.

Update: WMAL reports that Webb refused to call for Kerry to apologize:

Webb would not comment on whether Kerry should apologize for his remarks. Kerry has said that he had botched a joke and his comments were misconstrued, but Webb said -- quote -- ``he needs to work on his punch line.''

"He needs to work on his punchline?" So Webb thinks it's fine to use the sacrifice of our troops in Iraq for a sick political joke, so long as you get the punch line right?

Meanwhile, while Webb is carrying the water for John Kerry, Kerry has once again acted like a good democrat and done a "cut and run" on his policy of "apologizing to no one".

Webb should never have joined the democrat party. They abandoned him as a soldier in Vietnam, and Kerry just abandoned him again when Webb thought he should fight for Kerry.

In other words, Webb is defending a man for a comment that was so awful that the man he defended has APOLOGIZED now for the remarks.

Will Webb now retract his statement of support for Kerry's "botched joke", and return the hundreds of thousands of dollars of money Kerry gave him?

Not likely.

Jack asks, We provide -- Allen's record of accomplishment

From the State Attorney General:

As governor, George Allen brought high academic standards and accountability to the commonwealth, and Virginia became a national model of educational excellence. He completely reformed Virginia's welfare system and put former welfare recipients on the path to good jobs and economic independence. As a result, the state's welfare rolls are down dramatically.

His historic and innovative reform of Virginia's juvenile-justice laws fixed a broken system. George Allen abolished parole for criminals and instituted truth-in-sentencing. The results speak for themselves: Over the last decade violent crime in Virginia has decreased by 20 percent. And violent crime is at its lowest point since 1978. These statistics are directly attributable to the reforms put in place by George Allen. All Virginians are safer today because of George Allen's leadership.

George Allen left the governor's office in 1998 with Virginia having become a national model in public safety, economic development, educational accountability, and good government. He ushered in greater government efficiency through his Blue Ribbon Strike Force, and reduced the number of state employees to save the commonwealth money. He brought 312,000 new jobs to the commonwealth.

Today, George Allen's extraordinary record as governor needs to be examined anew, for Virginia in 2006 continues to benefit from what Gov. Allen accomplished a decade ago. In fact, Jim Webb endorsed George Allen for Senate in 2000 because of Allen's outstanding record of leadership.

As a United States senator, George Allen has been a champion for the small-business community, which creates the majority of the new jobs in Virginia. He has taken the lead in keeping the Internet tax-free. He has championed an aggressive and proactive war on terror because he understands that the best way to keep America safe is to go after terrorists where they live and operate. He has been stalwart in supporting veterans by championing legislation for better health care and death benefits. And George Allen alone in this race understands the need to train scientists and mathematicians to keep America competitive in the global economy.

I have had the honor to work closely with several governors over the past 15 years. While the governors I have worked with have each achieved their own great successes, no one has been as successful as George Allen. And George Allen is an equally successful individual on a personal level. I know him to be a very decent, down-to-earth, hard-working public servant who loves his family and the commonwealth. He is motivated by the same passion for freedom and liberty that America's founders were.

Will Webb follow Kerry over the Shark?

Kerry has jumped the shark, and democrats seem to be following him. Will Webb go along with the crowd?

My opinion is that Kerry meant to say what he said, but he didn't think about what it meant. As I explained in a previous post, many liberals in the democrat party complain about "rich republicans" not sending their kids to war, while poor people who are uneducated have no choice but to send their children to war because they can't get good jobs.

But Even if you believe Kerry didn't mean to insult the troops, that leaves us with two absolute truths:

1. He claims he wanted to take a cheap, false shot at the President during a war, simply to rally a political crowd for an election. His claim is that he messed up a "joke" that Bush was an idiot who got us "stuck" in Iraq. Does Kerry think its FUNNY that our troops are being killed in Iraq?
2. His WORDS, what he actually SAID, were definitely offensive and insulting to our troops. Even if he didn't MEAN to say it, he DID say it. He should apologize for what he SAID, because what he SAID was that stupid people end up fighting in Iraq. When you mis-speak, and are called out for it, the RIGHT thing to do is to thank your accusers for pointing out your error, and apologize and explan the error. Instead, Kerry, having MISSPOKEN and insulted the troops, then chooses to make cheap personal attacks against those who took his words at FACE VALUE.

The Republicans didn't make up a SINGLE WORD of what Kerry said. Kerry claims he mis-spoke, which admits that the words he spoke were bad. Any decent person would apologize.
If I wanted to call you a great american, and instead I said you were unamerican, I would apologize if you yelled at me, not call you "doughy" or a "stuffed suit".

When Kerry realised that he had called the troops stupid, the right thing to do was to apologize for misspeaking. If he was honorable, he would also apologize for trying to make fun of the President in a time of war using our troops as foils (which is what his claimed "joke" did).

Instead, Kerry refuses to apologizes for the words he actually said, and instead has called McCain a liar, called the President's press secretary a "stuffed suit", called Rush Limbaugh "doughy" (Rush hasn't been fat for years), and declared the entire republican party dispicable.

Which would normally get you laughed off the stage.

You webbies have a special reason to call for Kerry to apologize or resign. When George Allen misspoke a single word, the claim was that he hurt one person, and you and the media were all over him to apologize personally, and many said it made him unfit.

Kerry, as the tape clearly shoes, said words that insulted EVERY military member in Iraq. Whether he meant to or not, that's what he SAID, and you should be calling for him to apologize.

And Webb, who allowed his campaign staffer to make the claims, allowed his official campaign film to be used to attack his opponent for his simple misspoken word, should now stand up for the troops and call on Kerry to apologize for the WORDS HE ACTUALLY SAID.

But Webb probably won't do this. After all, when republicans point out what Democrats have ACTUALLY SAID, Democrats always claim that is a personal negative attack.

That's what Kerry just did -- said that while he SAID the words, he didn't MEAN to, and therefore the REPUBLICANS are wrong to point out what he SAID. Just as the Webb campaign claimed it was WRONG for republicans to quote from Webb's books, or to quote what Webb said about women 30 years ago.

Update: I've given up expecting a non-partisan, objective viewpoint from ANY news source in america until after the election. But here's what a reporter for the BBC in England had to say:

George Bush and Dick Cheney have been working overtime (and racking up air miles) to rally conservative stalwarts in the final days before the elections, and on Monday they got a gift from an unexpected source: John Kerry.

As the president was telling the good people of Texas that the Democrats did not want to win in Iraq, his former rival was in California insulting the troops.

Or so Mr Bush and his spokesman would have us believe. And when you review Mr Kerry’s comment, it’s hard to argue:

"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq," he said, eliciting chuckles from the students.

The president demanded an apology, and some furious military bloggers also pounced, calling Mr Kerry a disgrace.

Senator Kerry came out swinging in response, saying he had botched a joke aimed at the president - and that he would apologise to no-one for his criticism. But his tough talk reminded me of an old political maxim: If you're explaining, you're losing.

John Kerry clearly thinks he is going to run for president again in 2008. If he doesn’t have jokes funnier than this, he's going to lose again. And in the meantime, he's not doing his party any favours this year.

It is also revealing that, when Kerry made his "botched joke" insult to the troops, the democrat students there to hear his speech laughed, even though they would have no idea Kerry was making a joke about the president getting troops killed in Iraq. They laughed has is "mis-spoken" words. Which is why it's easy to believe a democrat would have meant what Kerry said.

Update 2: Well, it seems some democrats understand that Kerry insulted the troops and should have apologized. Now they are cancelling appearances with Kerry, and calling on him to apologize. For example, Kerry was supposed to appear for a candidate in Iowa later this week:

Iowa candidate asks Kerry to cancel campaign visit

DES MOINES, Iowa A Democratic Congressional candidate from Iowa is canceling a campaign event later this week with Senator John Kerry.

Brucy Braley says Kerry's recent comments about the Iraq war were inappropriate.

Braley is running against Republican Mike Whalen in Iowa's First District congressional race. It's a contest considered to be one of the most competitive House races in the country.

Braley's decision to distance himself from Kerry came as a furor grew from comments Kerry made about the Iraq War during a campaign stop in California on Monday.

Meanwhile, Kerry has cancelled ALL of his campaign appearances for TOMORROW, he was supposed to be campaigning for Bob Casey in Pennsylvania.

But Webb is still sticking by his new-found friend. If Webb wasn't such a flip-flopper, he wouldn't have ever befriended the flip-flopper-in-chief, Kerry, and now he wouldn't have to worry about his Hobson's choice: Correctly denounce Kerry's actual words, and call for an apology (which would hurt Webb with the DailyKos netroots people who are his lifeblood) or stand by Kerry's words, which clearly insulted people like Webb's son, and risk alienating every military voter in Virginia.