North Coast Online

Gore In His Neo-Con Days

Enjoy a chuckle while watching this video of a much younger, but even then pedantic, Al Gore chastising the elder Bush for having ignored the obvious connections between Saddam Hussein and Muslim terrorists.

What's For Lunch Tomorrow, Spitz?

Governor Spitzer really cares about the chiiiildren, and to prove it he'd like to tell them just exactly what and how much of it they should eat.

Since introducing legislation he called “an important step in the fight against childhood obesity,” Spitzer has seen both houses of the Legislature reshape his proposal, removing such items as precisely how many calories a milk carton may contain or the percentage of whole grain products that must be offered each week on a lunch menu.

Lawmakers bristled at the extent of the food mandate. Spitzer’s bill was so precise that it had to include a clause assuring that its provisions are not meant to apply “to the consumption of water from drinking fountains.”

I know this is the kind of policy that Democrats just love -- government planning out our lives in great and organized detail.  But I find it bemusing and quite alarming that our Governor is such a micro-manager (control freak in the vernacular) that he'd submit legislation this detailed to solve what most of us don't even consider a problem.

I'm sure that school food can be improved but I'm also pretty certain that there are wise and skilled people in each and every district capable of doing that.  Perhaps some gubernatorial exhortations might be in  order to get the ball rolling, but can the Soviet-style planning -- please.

[UPDATE:] In an unrelated story, Congressman Higgins is hinting that news may soon be forthcoming about some changes to the highway system on the Outer Harbor.

Pressed for details, Higgins would say only that the office of Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer is working on more detailed plans.

Oh, you can just bet they are.

Back To The Future

What do the Europeans know that their sycophants, the Democrats, don't?

Now that French voters are giving him a decisive parliamentary majority, President Nicolas Sarkozy is going to launch a pro-growth, tax cutting, deregulation, reform plan.

In other words, Reaganomics finally comes to France.

Here at home, all the Democrats running for president (except New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson) want to raise personal and corporate taxes. They want to punish profits.

So, let me get this right: while Reaganomics spreads from Eastern Europe—with low flat tax plans proliferating everywhere—into Western Europe, the supply-side model still has not infiltrated the Democratic party.

And to make matters worse, House Dems are now proposing a 4.3 percent surtax on successful earners that will allegedly solve the AMT problem, but in fact, might end up hitting families making as low as $75,000 according to last Friday’s Washington Post article.

The Democrats are stuck in a punitive, soak-the-rich time warp with class warfare written all over it.

Indeed.

Crimes And Punishments

I'll give the News editorial board partial credit for recognizing that Lewis Libby's sentence was over the top. 

It does seem, however, that a very valid point about the rule of law could have been made without going to the extreme of sending a previously law-abiding, highly accomplished citizen off to prison for 30 months and fining him $250,000. That’s on top of the implosion of his career, emotional pain loaded onto his family and what must be millions in legal fees he now owes.

They're docked points, however, for this piece of spin.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald certainly left no stone unturned in his valid quest for the source of the leak of Valerie Plame’s identity. Valid because the CIA feared that one of its prized assets had been compromised just to lash out at a former ambassador — Plame’s husband, Joseph Wilson — who had publicly questioned the White House claim that Saddam Hussein had been shopping around Africa for the stuff to make nuclear bombs with.

Fitzgerald already knew who the "leaker" was before Libby was questioned -- former Clinton administration member Richard Armitage who, you'll notice, has never been charged.  He also knew very quickly that Valerie Plame's name couldn't really be "leaked" because she wasn't in a protected CIA job.  No crime had been committed, yet he continued to investigate until he found a scapegoat to indict on something so as to provide some atonement for the crimes that Democrats insist the Bush administration had committed.

It's all the more infuriating because Sandy Berger (another Clinton administration member, oddly enough) walks the streets a free man even though he admittedly stole classified documents from the National Archives.  Lewis Libby committed perjury to a grand jury and deserves punishment, but his sentence is hardly justice and the Buffalo News isn't telling you the full story.

The Verdict Is In

This proves it, John Edwards is stark, raving crazy.

Senator Edwards is outlining a new national security strategy that includes the creation of a 10,000-person civilian peace corps to stem the tide of terrorism in weak and unstable countries.

Mr. Edwards's plan, which he presented in Manhattan yesterday, comes less than a week after he called President Bush's war on terror a "bumper sticker slogan" and said the current national security strategy has not made America safer.

I suppose this fits well with Dennis Kucinich's plans for a Department of Peace, but the naivete that could lead someone to even pretend that a sort of peace corps could stem blind, suicidal religious fanaticism is stunning.  Now, I realize that his far-left base will find this proposal downright thrilling as it allows them to feel that they're not ignoring the problem of Islamic fascism.   It will probably invoke a fair amount of JFK nostalgia amongst his elderly supporters, too. 

How long can the Democrat party continue basing its foreign policy on New Age notions of good deeds and vibrations? Until they win, I suppose.  Though they do have the example of Jimmy Carter who turned the other cheek to disastrous consequences throughout his term -- that's what we should be afraid of.

Rage Against The Machine(s)

I see Judy Einach's running for Common Council in my district (Niagara).

The retiring Council member [Bonifacio] endorsed Peter Savage Jr., an assistant corporation counsel favored by Brown. The Hoyt candidate is Buffalo Police Officer David Rivera, while Judith Einach, a community activist who unsuccessfully ran an independent campaign for mayor in 2005, also has entered the race.

Let's see, Brown's endorsed a government-insider lawyer. I think we've got enough of those in City Hall.  Hoyt's mini-machine is supporting a Buffalo Police Office.  Now, I have deep respect for the police, but I'm not terribly keen on city employees serving in government which is, after all, their employer.  Right at the moment I'd have to say that Einach sounds pretty good.

Of course, if there's a Republican in the district who decides to run I'll have to consider that as well.  I do know that it won't be me --  but I can't say for sure what plans the other two have.

[UPDATE:] I don't mean to intimate that Ms. Einach is a good candidate only because the others aren't, the campaign hasn't started yet and therefore no one's really put forward any ideas.  I was able to meet her during the mayoral campaign and was impressed.  Judy and the Common Council might be a very good fit. 

Self-Fulfilling Investigations

John Edwards makes a bold and brave statement.

Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards on Thursday called for a federal investigation into possible antitrust violations by the oil industry and criticized oil companies for raising gas prices.

Of course, he qualified it in the next sentence.

``There's absolutely no justification for the gas companies to be as profitable as they are and have the taxpayers subsidizing the industry,'' Edwards said.

You're right, John.  Why not campaign to do away with oil company subsidies and then leave them alone?  What?  You say that would take away your justification for using oil as a campaign issue?  Oh, I see.

Shared Misery

Hillary calls for a renewed collective effort.

It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society.

Scott at Powerline writes, "Not since I was 16 have I wanted so badly to be on my own."

The Breck Girl Exposed

I don't know if Democrats will be influenced by tales of John Kerry's supposed discomfort for John Edwards; in fact, I don't even know if they're true (this is Bob Shrum after all).

He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he'd never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he'd do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade's ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he'd never shared the memory with anyone else. Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn't pick Edwards unless he met with him again.

Delicious stuff.

Saving The Stupid

One year after that Rod Watson's Buffalo News series that criticized rent-to-own stores, Senator Schumer is still out there flogging them.

Nationwide, the fast-growing rent-to-own industry has more than 8,300 stores serving an estimated 2.7 million customers. The industry is dominated by two publicly traded companies — Rent-A-Center of Plano, Texas, and Aaron Rents of Atlanta. There are about 60 rent-to-own stores in the Buffalo area, including 13 Rent-ACenter locations surveyed last week by Schumer’s staff.

Citing that research, Schumer said a 27-inch Toshiba television that retails for $299.99 locally cost $909.35 after 65 weekly payments at Rent-ACenter. That’s a 203.13 percent markup over 15 months.

Similarly, a Whirlpool stove selling at retail for $699.99 was $2,183.09 after 91 weeks or 21 months, while a $299.99 Whirlpool air conditioner sold for $779.70 after 30 weeks and a $529.99 Whirlpool refrigerator cost $1,637.09 after 91 weeks.

If the rent-to-own stores state the terms of payment up front and deliver the product as advertised, then Senator Schumer should have nothing to say about it.  "But, Craig," you ask, "what about those high prices?"   

Look, it's safe to assume that a solid chunk of rent-to-own customers don't follow through on their payments and that the store will have to send people out to reclaim its inventory.  Given their customer base, it's also not a stretch to imagine that a fair portion of that inventory will have been mistreated and damaged to the point that it's not fit to be re-sold.

How else are they to offset those costs but by charging high prices?

No one forces people to buy from these stores.  There are plenty of options:  save up first and then buy, buy used (cheap) or clean up your credit and go into hock like the middle class does.  But Senator Schumer has based his career on treating his constituents as if we all have an extra chromosome (as Al Gore would put it) and with praise like this from the Buffalo News he's not likely to stop any time soon.

 

In The 'You Can't Make This Up Department'

Edwards charges $55,000 to speak to UC Davis students about poverty

Advantage Bush

In news favorable to the President, the Dems have thrown in the towel and will submit a spending plan for the Iraq War without pork and without a surrender date.  Both party's nominations become more interesting.

Those Easily Scandalized Democrats

Don Surber attempts to show what a scandal isn't.

The New York Times lead editorial today tries to explain “Why This Scandal Matters.”

A true scandal should be self-evident and need no explanation.

The firing of a few will-and-pleasure employees by the Bush administration is routine. But it is another in a series of faux scandals dreamed up by desperate Democrats who are the sorest losers in American history.

It began with the lie that Bush somehow stole the election in Florida. Al Gore was allowed to drag this nation’s electoral process through the mud by an anti-Republican media, led by the oafs at the New York Times. An unprecedented recount by the media proved Bush won. It made the back pages of the Times.

Where is the apology to the nation from Gore?

Where is the apology from the New York Times?

Next was the auto pen “controversy.” The New York Times tried to create a scandal because some crook in jail received an invite to the inauguration.

Next was Vice President Dick Cheney’s “secret” negotiations with energy companies over an energy bill. The Sierra Club and others sued in court to try to get papers turned over regarding the meetings.

Next was Sen. Robert C. Byrd slamming the president for failing to take the lead on the Kyoto Protocols. This is the same Robert C. Byrd who sponsored the anti-Kyoto resolution that passed 95-0 in the Senate when Clinton was president.

Next was the Enron scandal. Bush’s critics swore up and down that Ken Lay would never be tried. Well he was tried and convicted and sentenced — for things he did on Bill Clinton’s watch.

Apology?

More here.

HT here.

Please, By All Means, Make A Lot Of Money -- Just Don't Make A 'Profit'

Perhaps Obama envisions a world where we all work for the government.

In his commencement speech at Southern New Hampshire University this morning, Obama — like most commencement speakers — delivered a call to public service; unlike many, however, he also warned against the charms of doing what most college graduates set out to do: Make money.

"In a few minutes, you can take your diploma, walk off this stage and go chasing after the big house and the large salary and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy.

"But I hope you don’t. Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. And it will leave you unfulfilled," he told the crowd.

I suppose pursuing a career as a highly-paid lawyer counts, too.  TJIC questions BO's wisdom.

God forbid graduates go out and try to create value for society, capturing some portion of that new value as their own salaries.

Far better that they spend their life

• majoring in political “science”
• working for a meaningless non-profit
• trying to register more people to vote so that the negative-sum game of politics can have more credibility
• helping political partisans redrawn electoral district boundaries in the same negative-sum game of politics
• being a senator, pushing for more regulations and tax increases

That, clearly, is a fulfilling life.

Let the suckers create value.

The best and brightest should just steal it, and move it around (while taking some portion of it for themselves, and destroying another portion of it).

Yeah, the hoi-polloi can run bed-and-breakfasts.

Delicious Developments In Democratville

Time Magazine is obviously unhappy with the current crop of Democrats vying for the Presidency.  The title of this week's cover article, The Last Temptation Of Al Gore, should give you an idea of the esteem in which the great bloviator, the former Vice President of our cherished fruited plain, is held by the editors.

Let's say you were dreaming up the perfect stealth candidate for 2008, a Democrat who could step into the presidential race when the party confronts its inevitable doubts about the front runners. You would want a candidate with the grass-roots appeal of Barack Obama—someone with a message that transcends politics, someone who spoke out loud and clear and early against the war in Iraq. But you would also want a candidate with the operational toughness of Hillary Clinton—someone with experience and credibility on the world stage.

Yeah, we need someone like Hillary or Obama -- not just, um, them.  He's not a woman, she's not black and the other's a proven election-loser. I say this is good news -- very good news.  Only the liberal Michael Bloomberg's entry into the race as an independent with $1 billion of his own money to spend could bode better for the Republicans' chances than Gore's splitting the party in three.

I can see the bumperstickers on those Priuses now:  "Al Gore 2008 -- Hey, George Isn't Running, He Might Win This Time."  Inspiring stuff.

Changing The Rules

The American media really does not give us the information we need to make informed decisions.  For example, did you know that the House Democrats have been considering a change in the rules not tampered with since 1822?  The Dems don't want their members to have to go on record as supporting tax increases; the Republicans are forcing their hand.

More "Do As I Say"

The still-not-quite-ready-for-prime-time Barack Obama cruised into the motor city Monday to lecture the American auto industry on its failure to improve fuel economy.

"For years, while foreign competitors were investing in more fuel-efficient technology for their vehicles, American auto makers were spending their time investing in bigger, faster cars," he declared. "And whenever an attempt was made to raise our fuel-efficiency standards, the auto companies would lobby furiously against it, spending millions to prevent the very reform that could've saved their industry."

But he didn't show up in a Prius or even a Corolla, nope he drove his good ol' Chrysler 300.

So his choice to drive a V8 Hemi-powered Chrysler 300C emits a whiff of hypocrisy along with its exhaust fumes. Obama's choice proves once again that fuel economy is seldom the No. 1 factor when Americans buy cars. The 340-horsepower 300C has plenty of room for the lanky senator, his wife, Michelle, and their two daughters. It gets 25 miles per gallon on the highway, good for a big sedan, but far short of hybrids and compact cars.

His campaign Thursday said it leases a flex-fuel vehicle, and Obama, whose family has just one car, "believes we need to work together to achieve energy independence."

So although owning a hybrid is politically correct for presidential aspirants -- many report that they do -- this week reminds Detroit that campaigning still is sometimes about doing what I say, not what I do.

The Dems live to point out sexual hypocrisy on the part of Republicans.  Would that our side would do more to highlight their economic humbug.

Batter Up

I'm sure that my opinion of Bill Richardson won't seriously affect his chances of winning the Democrats' nomination for president, but it's only fair to say that the guy's a big wienie.  For starters, he's a power-hungry hypocrite.

In 2003, The Washington Post reported that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson routinely ordered his driver to whip down public roads at speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour. Even after those reports, when a police officer attempted to pull over Richardson's car for speeding in 2005, the governor's driver refused to stop. In the last two years, Richardson's lieutenant governor has also been caught running a red light and parking in a fire zone.

 

For his part, Richardson refused to apologize for his law-breaking. He said he'd instruct his drivers to slow down, but cited his busy schedule as governor and said he wouldn't promise not to speed again. By April 2006, his car was seen pushing 90 again.

And then there's the question of his resume. 

NPR reported today on an admittedly clever ad he's posted on Youtube.   In it, he's portrayed as interviewing for a job (president, get it).  The interviewer dismisses his qualifications and ends up  declaring Richardson overqualified.  But NPR (and I suspect the rest of the mainstream media) miss the exquisite irony that, for years, Richardson included in his real resume the lie that he'd once been drafted by the Kansas City Athletics.

He's since come clean and because he's a Democrat, I suppose, the whole matter has been buried.  But I can't help but wish that the Youtube ad had included his imagined batting averages, too.

Follow The Money

Paul at Powerline discusses the vapidity of John Edwards's proposals to reunite his perceived two Americas.

The centerpiece of the Edwards plan is to do away with public housing projects and replace them with one million rental vouchers through which to disperse the poor into better neighborhoods, closer to good schools and jobs. However, as the Post explains, a major federal experiment started during the Clinton administration shows that dispersing poor families in this fashion does not improve earnings or school performance. When this inconvenient truth was brought to Edwards' attention during his November 2005 symposium on poverty, he apparently had no answer.

I also wonder whether Edwards can explain (except by reference to political calculation) why he favors vouchers that would enable poor families to relocate but opposes private school vouchers. If the idea is to give poor families choices through which they can improve their lives, it's difficult to see why school choice should be off the table. Moving poor people close to good jobs they lack the skills to perform is meaningless. The key is education, but Edwards is not interested in maximizing educational opportunities. Nor, he admits, is he interested in talking, as Barack Obama, does about the need for the poor to take more personal responsibility. That message, he says, won't play well coming from him.

It's obvious that he doesn't want to diminish his potential contributions from the teachers' unions.  Evidently the unions representing public housing employees aren't coughing up.  But, please, stay tuned -- that could change.

And Fire Can't Melt Steel

The Democrats love -- indeed, they revel -- in calling themselves the rational party.  Not encumbered by any silly religious beliefs (except when they're courting the black vote, of course,) they insist that what's left is pure, unadulterated reason.  It's all crap of course as illustrated in this Rasmussen poll.

Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.

Republicans reject that view and, by a 7-to-1 margin, say the President did not know in advance about the attacks. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 18% believe the President knew and 57% take the opposite view.

61% of Democrats are not sure that Bush didn't know about the 9/11 attacks beforehand.   My gosh, it's become a party of paranoiacs.  I like to think that screwballs like Rosie O'Donnell are a cosseted and tiny minority who say what they say out of a desire to get headlines.  This poll causes me to wonder.

Hey, to hell with the Independents, the Republicans need to go after the shrinking minority of Democrats who still have some grip on reality.

Schadenfreude Or Shared Misery?

Somehow it cheers me up when a Democrat is disgusted with his own party.

Gone Fishing

The Buffalo News editorial board whined yesterday that the dead-end Congressional investigation of Alfredo Gonzales is diverting the Democrats from the "real" corruption of the Bush administration.  Fred Barnes explains what that amounts to: must--get--Rove.

He is the chief target of Democrats, liberals, and the left, and they burn with a desire to see him discredited, fired, and jailed. If all else fails, and it has so far, they'll settle for tainting him as impolite [a la Sheryl Crow].

A few Democrats have talked of impeaching President Bush, but that idea is a nonstarter. Representative Dennis Kucinich has called for impeaching Vice President Cheney. But with enemies like Kucinich, Cheney doesn't need friends. When the Democratic presidential candidates were polled at a debate in South Carolina last week, they pointedly failed to agree with Kucinich. So that leaves Rove at the top of the Democratic hit list.

Rove is more than a symbol. He is the architect of Bush's election triumphs and an influential player in pushing the president's agenda. He represents Republican success. The Democratic strategy now is to criminalize that success by treating normal political conduct by the Bush administration, spearheaded by Rove, as a series of criminal acts.

[excerpted]

So what are Rove's crimes? That's what Democrats, now in control of Congress and armed with subpoena power, are desperately looking for. Their hopes initially rested with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. When he cleared Rove of wrongdoing in the CIA leak case, their disappointment was palpable.

Now they've turned to congressional fishing expeditions.

The Congressional Democrats, in other words, are playing Nifong to Rove's lacrosse player.

Votes Do Count

Mickey Kaus notes that the Democrats don't talk much about affirmative action these days -- much as they steer away from talk of gun control (or gay marriage I might add -- New York's Governor Spitzer excepted.)

If There Were Ever A Person Better Suited To Roam

Hillary has decided on Bill Clinton's role in her administration.

Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday that if she is elected president, she would make her husband a roaming ambassador to the world, using his skills to repair the nation's tattered image abroad.

I know, I know, it writes itself, doesn't it?  But it would get him out of the house, the White one that is.

True To Their Roots To The End

James Taranto has noticed a similarity between Democrats now and Democrats then.

 

• "I believe . . . that this war is lost, and this surge is     not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this     week."--Senate Democratic Leader Harry     Reid, April 19, 2007
     
   
 

• "Resolved, that this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense     of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union     by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretence of military necessity,     or war power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been     disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden     down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice,     humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be     made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view to an ultimate convention     of the States or other peaceable means, to the end that at the earliest practicable     moment peace may be restored on the basis of the federal Union of the States."--1864     Democratic platform

How long before they start calling Iraq another Chancellorsville.

 

How Bush Administration Scandals Begin

Day 1

The New York Times reports that President Bush regularly holds clandestine gatherings among his hand-selected cronies, who devise federal policy in secret, as a sort of “shadow government.”

The White House issues a press release explaining that those gatherings are merely cabinet meetings, that every administration has them, and that the cabinet secretaries have all had their nominations confirmed by the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid complains that the president did not consult the Democrats before holding any of these “so-called cabinet meetings,” and therefore that he’s violating the constitutional separation of powers. He adds that none of the secretaries was confirmed while the Democrats controlled the Senate, and argues that their nominations should all be resubmitted.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) appears on “Hardball,” where he likens the meetings to the activities of the Third Reich, which also conducted government business in secret.

Read the rest here.

There Oughta Be A Law

One of the top ten signs that the war on drugs has probably been lost.

First, the state said you must make a special trip to the pharmacy counter to buy certain cold medicines. That was to curb production of methamphetamine.

Now, a St. Louis legislator wants you to do the same thing to buy an even more common household item — baking soda — because it's used to make crack cocaine.

For those of you inclined to follow such developments, the baking soda bill is HB1189.  The sad thing is that if this bill were passed, people would probably just accept it and dutifully stand in line to sign the logbook explaining that they were buying some refrigerator deodorizer.  That's what really scares me -- the acceptance of these silly, obtrusive laws.

Oh, did I mention that the bill's sponsor is a Democrat?  But, then, you've already figured that out, haven't you.

Grandmother Diplomacy

Nancy Pelosi went to Syria . . .

After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process" as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. "We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria," she said.

Only one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message.

Pitiful -- and ultimately dangerous.

[UPDATE:] Roger L. Simon: "Nancy is the emblem of the kind aristocratic arrogance I used to associate with Republicans. I note the NYT is not covering her peregrinations on the front page - they're probably too embarrassed."

Let 'Em In!

There have been rumors that New York's Mike Bloomberg has been mulling over running for president.  I think that with this outburst, that would prove a futile endeavor.

MAYOR Bloomberg has come out swinging against a fellow mayor trying to impose one of the most restrictive bans against illegal aliens in the nation.

At a civic meeting in Brooklyn last week, Bloomberg verbally attacked Louis Barletta, the mayor of Hazleton, Pa., who enacted a law barring undocumented immigrants from holding jobs or renting apartments.

The law gained nationwide attention, leading to a challenge from civil-rights groups. A federal judge is currently weighing whether it's constitutional.

Responding to a question from the audience in Sunset Park, which has seen an influx of immigrants in recent years, Bloomberg vigorously defended immigrants as hardworking.

There's an excellent argument to be made for loosening the restrictions against immigration to the United States.  But there's none at all for turning a blind eye to those who've come here illegally -- unless, of course, it has something to do with abolishing the concept of citizenship and national sovereignty.

[UPDATE:] When I said that a race by Bloomberg would be futile that was assuming he ran as a Republican, a polite fiction he's maintained for a couple years now.  If he were to run as a Democrat, though, his pro-illegal immigrant stance would definitely be a plus. 

If Only

In a perfect and benevolent world the following would come true.

Insight magazine reports that Al Gore is contemplating running for president...as the nominee of the Green Party.

"Sources close to Gore said Ralph Nader has sought to recruit the former vice president," said Insight. "They said Gore has not rejected the offer and was consulting with family and friends to determine the feasibility of such a candidacy."

Hey, I can dream can't I?

Getting Out The Teen Vote

Presidential politics descend to the infantile -- literally.

Ilana Wexler has a dilemma. The Hillary Clinton for President campaign wants her to chair its Students for Hillary committee. At the same time, several of her friends are stumping for Barack Obama and want her to join their team. But if Wexler, 15, has her way, Al Gore will declare his candidacy, and she'll endorse him.

It figures that Clinton et al would covet the Ilana Factor: Three years ago, she was a plucky 12-year-old who started a grassroots organization called Kids for Kerry and addressed the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

I guess the theory is to develop legions of future  Democrats.  Maybe it'll work but I can think of one young Goldwaterite whose political loyalties turned out to be, um, shall we say fickle.  I guess I won't hold my breath waiting to hear which lucky candidate Ilana decides to endorse.

What A Waste Of Our Time

The Democats and the media (but I repeat myself) are celebrating the passage of the House Bill calling for a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq by next Spring.  But who's kidding whom?  Nancy made sure the bill was larded up with billions in pork to buy the votes she needed to pass it and then added the withdrawal date as extra insurance that Bush would veto it.

I suppose some of the moonbat base will be mollified, but as an exercise in cynicism this bill is unequaled in recent memory.

Positively Orwellian

Gee, it turns out that 1984 Hillary ad wasn't a Republican plot after all.  Talk fight amongst yourselves -- please.

Another Day, Another Spin

Dick Morris calls it the phoniest scandal of the century.

There is no question that the attorney general and the president can dismiss United States attorneys at any time and for any reason. We do not have civil servant U.S. attorneys but maintain the process of presidential appointment for a very good reason: We consider who prosecutes whom and for what to be a question of public policy that should reflect the president’s priorities and objectives. When a U.S. attorney chooses to go light in prosecuting voter fraud and political corruption, it is completely understandable and totally legitimate for a president and an attorney general to decide to fire him or her and appoint a replacement who will do so.

Yesterday's spin was that an evidently secret provision in the Patriot Act had changed the rules regarding the replacement of U.S. attorneys.  They can now be appointed without Senate confirmation and the Democrats are outraged -- outraged I tell you.  If Schumer and Leahy, both of whom voted for the Act, were unaware of this yet the Bush White House knew about it then who are the dummies here? 

Timing Is Everything

Well, I'll give the media a little credit, occasionally they are asking why Bush's firing of eight U.S. attorneys is worse than Clinton's sacking all 93.  Unfortunately, they're settling for less than, um, satisfying answers.  Dahlia Lithwick had perhaps the most laughable response to that question on this week's edition of NPR's On The Media.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: Okay. So then what do you think of the spin [sic] that's been floated by a lot of Republicans and some of the conservative media that the current firings, as The Wall Street Journal said, are business as usual, that the Clintons did it even worse?

DAHLIA LITHWICK: That particular counter-example is absolutely inapposite, and, I think, unfair. And nobody expects when a new President from an opposing party comes in that all the U.S. attorneys [LAUGHS] would continue to serve, because, as I said, these are political appointments. They go to people whose views comport with yours.

So to say, wait a minute, you know, George Bush only fired 8, Clinton fired 93, is to sort of, I think, lose the point. There's a difference between putting 93 new people in at the beginning of your term and getting rid of eight of them in the middle of their term because you don't like that they're not going after [LAUGHS] Democrats. So it's a very inept, and, I think, unfair comparison.

As Porky Pig used to say, "Th-th-th-th-that's all folks."   It wasn't that Bush's firings were illegal, it's just that he didn't fire them when he first took office.  The Democrats are calling for White House subpoenas and scheduling Congressional hearings because his timing was off.  If only he'd thought to do it sooner, then no one would have minded.   

Dahlia finds the comparison "very inept" and "unfair" and so it is.  Clinton fired the entire U.S. attorney corps and no doubt threw the entire system into virtual paralysis until they were replaced.  The Bush 8 pales into insignificance by comparison, yet the Democrats are making comparisons to Watergate, calling for the resignation of the Attorney General and preparing their next show trial. 

I was listening to the show in the car on the way home from work Saturday and almost had to pull over when Ms. Lithwick let loose with that howler.   

Calvin Kleins No Doubt

John Edwards appears to be trying out the Underpants Gnome theory in a presidential election.  He's running far to the left of Hillary and Barack as this article illustrates. 

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards proposed today that the United States spend $5 billion annually to lead a worldwide effort to end global poverty through education and health care initiatives.

The former North Carolina senator said his effort would not only be a “good and moral thing,” but it would also make the United States safer

He is correct that easing third world poverty would prove a security benefit to the U.S. but throwing more money at it by itself won't do much.  For that $5 billion a year in education and health care to do any real good we would have to somehow get around the corrupt dictators that rule those countries and who have a proclivity for siphoning off foreign aid to the benefit of their cronies.

Does Mr. Edwards have the stomach to confront that?  The undeveloped world is undeveloped because it's run by people with no regard for their own.  Sub-Saharan Africa, almost to a country, has been mired in war, genocide and starvation since the Europeans left in the late 50's.  In the meantime America has dumped billions down the rathole without any positive results.

If Edwards were truly concerned about poverty, he'd be calling for a strong American foreign policy that refused to support corrupt despots and encouraged the sorts of reform we've seen in Southeast Asia (think Taiwan, Hong Kong, Viet Nam and China.)  But of course he won't, his entire campaign so far is based on guilt.

Guilt that some of us are well-off and that somehow it's our fault that the rest aren't.  I just can't believe that will pay off -- at least after the Democrat primaries.  What's his plan B?  At this early point in the campaign, Mr. Edwards's underpants strategy seems to be

1. Tack left
2. ?
3. Win election

It remains to be seen if stealing Hillary's drawers this early in the election cycle will pay off.

 

That Was Then, This Is Now

Yesterday I posted on the kerfuffle over the firing of 8 U.S. attorneys by the Bush administration.  The Buffalo News was duly outraged and Schumer is calling for the resignation of the attorney general, but get a load of how the New York Times covered the firing of all 93 U.S. attorneys by the Clinton administration.

All 93 United States Attorneys knew they would be asked to step down, since all are Republican holdovers, and 16 have resigned so far. But the process generally takes much longer and had usually been carried out without the involvement of the Attorney General. Battles of the Past

Ms. Reno is under pressure to assert her control over appointments at the Justice Department. She was Mr. Clinton’s third choice for Attorney General and arrived after most of the department’s senior positions were already filled by the White House.

The comments of Ms. Reno and Mr. Stephens evoked the pitched battles of the past, when independent United States Attorneys resisted removal by new administrations.

In 1969, for instance Robert Morgenthau, now the Manhattan District Attorney, resisted efforts by the Nixon Administration to replace him as United States Attorney in New York until he was given what he called an “ultimatum” by President Richard M. Nixon to leave office.

In 1978, Attorney General Griffin B. Bell removed David W. Marston as United States Attorney in Philadelphia, provoking charges, never proved, that a lawmaker under scrutiny by Mr. Marston’s office had urged President Jimmy Carter to remove the prosecutor

Read the whole thing at Sweetness and Light, it's remarkably free of concern over political interference in the legal system and a straightforward report of a president's perfect right to replace people who serve at his pleasure.  Why, it's enough to make you think that the current uproar isn't based on principle so much as it's just another example of Democrats' being partisan.   

Huddled Masses Yearning To Vote For Us

Democrats in Minnesota are getting right down to the heart of the matter when it comes to the search for new voters.

A constitutional amendment introduced today in the Minnesota House would allow non-citizen residents to vote in local elections.

If the House and Senate pass the measure, 2008 voters would be asked: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to allow local units of government to authorize permanent resident non-citizens to vote in local government elections?" A majority of those voting in the 2008 general election would have to approve the measure for it to be written into the constitution.

But what then, you ask innocently, is the point of citizenship?  Ah, that is the point; there is none.  Citizens, you see, have an actual life-long stake in the actions of their government and Minnesota's Dems are sick and tired of occasionally losing an election because of it.

Hillary, That Bible-Totin' Woman

Kathleen Parker's column on Hillary's southern black preacher imitation is a good one.

Her audience, nevertheless, was polite and affirming, even as she turned on the worst fake accent since Kevin Costner played Robin Hood. Shouting the words from a gospel hymn, Clinton was so off-key that anyone tuning in would have assumed it was a joke — a parody of a politician speaking in native tongues, Granny Clampett auditioning on “American Idol.”

“I DON’T FEEL NO WAYS TIRED,” she said with the robotic twang of a computer generated Southerner. “I COME TOO FARRRR FRUM WHERE I STARTED FRUM. NOBODY TOLD ME THAT THE ROAD WOULD BE EASY.”

Somewhere deep in the brains of every man listening was a little lizard shouting: Somebody hit the mute button, for God’s sake, hit the mute!

Dim Bulbs

David Frum notes that the Democrats have gone dumb.

The Democratic Party of Nevada has fired Fox News as the broadcaster of its candidates' debate. That's their prerogative of course. But their explanation seems deliberately stupid: that Roger Ailes' joke about Barack Obama at a March 8 dinner crossed the line:

[I]t is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called Musharraf and said: 'Why can't we catch this guy?'

How dense do you have to be not to notice that this is a joke against President Bush??

As dense as a left-wing blogger I suppose ....

It's interesting that the Democrats added Nevada to their early primaries to get a little western perspective into the nominating process. But with the party out there evidently in the thrall of your garden variety east-coast far-left, I really can't see why they bothered.

But We Want It Now

An anti-war Democrat meets his base -- and tries to explain something the public schools should have taught them years ago.

If, Then?

Toni Morrison once declared Bill Clinton America's first black president.  But Could Edwards Become First Woman President?

The Religious Left

 

When you claim to speak for Jesus, be prepared for some questions.

1984

Damn. I just knew I was gonna enjoy the Democrats' fight for the nomination.

Hat tip to the Hairy Beast

Promises, Promises. I Believe In Promises, Promises

I certainly agree with Doug Turner that the Democrats have broken a bunch of promises since taking Congress.  But I'm relieved that they broke the one about getting us out of Iraq precipitously, and I'm very happy that they're at least negotiating on fast-track, free trade authority for the President. 

As for the promise about ethics?  C'mon, if you believed that one then I've got a twin-span to sell you.

Higgins Shows His Stripes

The Buffalo News didn't mention it, but Brian Higgins voted for the bill that would eliminate the need for a secret ballot to approve a union in a non-union business.  The Democrats claim that it's a needed counterweight to the ability of employers to intimidate employees, but does anyone in his right mind deny that unions are occasionally guilty of intimidation, too?

The secret ballot is the last refuge of the beleaguered worker who's under pressure from both his employer and the union.  If all that's required is his signature, then everyone knows his opinion and he's bound to be toast on one side or the other.  This bill puts workers in an untenable position and is nothing but a sop to the Democrats' primary financial contributor -- big labor.

And Higgins, by his vote, has forever dispelled any notion that he values economic development over his own career.  Buffalo, of all cities, has seen the economic wreckage that unions can create.  The House Democrats would spread that disaster nationwide. 

One more time for those of you in the Elmwood village:  unions do nothing but bid up the price of labor to the point that it's uneconomical to employ.  Union membership then begins to fall as employers find other means of getting the work done -- usually through mechanization or outsourcing.  Unions exist only to make life easier for their members and  particularly their leaders,  and it's becoming axiomatic that the numbers of those members must always decrease.

Labor contributed $1/4 million to Higgins campaign fund in 2005-2006 and his vote is what they were banking on.  Now, it may well be that Mr. Higgins truly voted his conscience and fervently believes that the bill will further the rights of workers and improve the economy, too.  But if that's the case, then he's certainly not the bright light we've been led to believe.  Shame on him for voting in favor of it.

[UPDATE:] Louise Slaughter voted "yes" as well.  I hope Danny Wegman's paying attention.  I'm sure he is.  She should know better, too.  Not much courage there.

All Your Base Are Royally Pissed Off

Powerline is having a rollicking good time watching the Democrats' complete disarray over how to deal with Iraq.  If they were elected to get us out of there as they claim, then why aren't they?

[UPDATE:] Speaking of disarray, Pelosi Delays Decision on Jefferson

It's so tough to decide which committee a fellow caucus member who's been filmed taking bribes should be placed on.  Ethics perhaps?

I Know, I Know. They "Care"

God bless ol' Drudge for highlighting this report.

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

As they did with the Kennedy's, the Democrats -- the party of the working people don'cha know -- have chosen another fabulously wealthy and hypocritical figure to revere.  Throw in the ostentatiously rich John Edwards, the very well-to-do Nancy Pelosi, the ever-wealthier Hillary and Bill and the whole thing becomes a colossal joke.

Whatever can the rank and file Democrats expect from these people? 

Republicans, rich and poor alike, support Republican policies because we would all like the opportunity to grow rich some day and we're not envious of those making it now.  But what do the Dems want?  The policies their favored heroes support make it more and more difficult to emulate the success they've already achieved.  I mean, even if they did succeed in extracting a few billion more from the wealthy they profess to disdain and giving it to the rest of us, it would only amount to $21.48 apiece.

Progressives love to cite the sophomoric book, What's The Matter With Kansas, to support their confusion over why why poor Republicans supposedly support policies that don't help them.  I think the market's fertile for some more of that ilk, What's The Matter With Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and MIchigan might make a good working title.

Young Skulls Full Of Greenhouse Gases

Full disclosure:  The following is not a Scrappleface satire.  It is an actual post on the Democrats' official website.

College Democrats of America President Lauren Wolfe, Hispanic Caucus Chair Laura DeCastro, CDA Black Caucus Chair Anthony Jones, CDA Asian Pacific Islander American Caucus Chair Varoon Modak and NYU's CDA Chapter President Nora Toiv today strongly criticized reports that College Republicans are once again playing deeply offensive anti-immigrant "games." This latest "game" has become part of a disturbing trend of College Republicans' events around the country, including events like "Catch/Find an Illegal Immigrant Day," which is being orchestrated by the NYU College Republicans.

How do the Democrats raise such humorless little ciphers (and of so many races and sexes genders?) Their ranks are crawling with them.  They're really nothing but conformist little moralists, with no morals, incapable of drawing a distinction between racism and the disapproval of illegal behavior.  But I tell you these young Democrats could be dangerous one day. 

That is, if the party can teach them how to cast a proper vote.  Something which has caused it trouble in the past and a task which, judging by this drivel, may not be an easy one.  And unfortunately for them, their allies in the teachers' unions won't prove much help.

What Would Louise Slaughter Say?

Democrats simply never cease to amaze me.

Activists are asking the Nevada Democratic Party to drop Fox News from broadcasting an August presidential primary debate in Reno.

A petition circulated online Thursday by MoveOn.org Civic Action, a group of activists, called the cable TV news network "a mouthpiece for the Republican Party, not a legitimate news channel," and asks Democrats to cut ties with it.

Head-shakingly childish.

Jumpin' Joe?

Senator Lieberman issued a not-so-veiled threat to his fellow Democrats today.  He doesn't want to switch parties, but there is one situation that might make him consider it.

He suggested, however, that the forthcoming showdown over new funding [for Iraq] could be a deciding factor that would lure him to the Republican Party.

"I hope we don't get to that point," Lieberman said. "That's about all I will say on it today. That would hurt."

The Democrats' avowed strategy of getting us out of Iraq by a thousand small military cuts is the most disgusting thing I've witnessed since they forced us to abandon the South Viet Namese to the Communists 30 years ago.  But I've got to admit that the prospect of their losing control of the Senate makes me long to see them follow through on their threats.

Big Carbon Footprints To Fill

First Nancy Pelosi demanded a transcontinental jet and now the Governor of Massachusetts has traded in his state-provided Ford for a Cadillac.  Well, it is American