#1
Gerachty sez: Democratic donors have given $2.6 million to Alan Grayson this cycle, and it is deeply satisfying to watch them waste their hard-earned dollars on a congressman who has absolutely no chance of retaining a seat in an R+2 district.
You cannot compare the opposing party to al-Qaeda and expect to retain your seat.
All the money in the world cant save you if you are fundamentally out of step with your districts values. In the end, his term in Congress will be remembered as a two-year-long, taxpayer-funded audition tape for MSNBC.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/22/2010 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Want proof positive that the GOP isn't Al Qaeda? Grayson hasn't gotten a bullet between the eyes or a car bomb at his house.
Rand Paul's (R-KY) campaign confirms that it has canceled his scheduled appearance on this Sundays' "Meet the Press."
The campaign says Paul's appearance on "Good Morning America" this morning is the last interview he will give on the Civil Rights controversy.
"When does my honeymoon period start? I had a big victory," Paul told George Stephanopoulos on "Good Morning America" today. "I've just been trashed up and down and they have been saying things that are untrue. And when they say I'm for repealing the Civil Rights Act, it's absolutely false. It's never been my position and something that I basically just think is politics."
#1
Rand realizes he stepped in do-do and is waiting for this brouhaha to settle down. The MSM loves to twist the words of anyone whom they ideologically disagree with or perceive as a threat. He will be set up in the future and had better learn to deal with it.
#2
First mistake was going on NPR and MSNBC and then not expecting an ambush. He should have said - "Of course I am for limited government and decentralization, but in the Civil Rights Act, we have a very rare case where Federal authority was required". He could even have added a comment about how most Democrats were opposed to the law.
Instead he's allowed the left/media to tar him and his supporters as RACISTS, which he and they are definitely not. Rand is definitely not ready for prime time.
#3
First mistake was going on NPR and MSNBC and then not expecting an ambush.
Bingo. A huge and possibly fatal rookie mistake. Rand's a 1st-time candidate for office who didn't realize that the MSM, save Fox and a handful of conservative papers and mags, is nothing more than the propaganda and opposition-research arm of the Quislingcrat Party. Even MSDNC's own Joe Scarborough asked "What the hell was Rand doing on MSNBC?"
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
05/22/2010 12:32 Comments ||
Top||
#4
He will be set up in the future and had better learn to deal with it.
Exactly. Glenn Reynolds (aka the Holy Blogfaddah, Instapundit) came up with an idea after Kutie Colic ambushed Sarah Palin - bring your own video team to any MSM interview. That way, when they try to cut 'n splice the footage to put you in your worst light, you have the ability to prove their dishonesty via YouTube.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
05/22/2010 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#5
bring your own video team to any MSM interview. Better yet, have your own video team record every public appearance. If you don't someone else will cut & splice.
#7
Might also consider the possibility that when playing on the big stage it's wise to drop the libertarian shock-schtick and give the impression of being a serious leader.
#8
But lotp, look at how much Ron Paul has accomplished in furthering limited government during his career with the same approach. Why, he's done so much... I'm sure some of it will occur to me in a couple minutes, REALLY.
...
Well, I'm sure I'll remember later. It's probably just my oldtimer's disease.
The Democrat-controlled Legislature passed measures that would enact an income tax surcharge on residents who earn over $1 million a year and use that money to restore rebates and other programs for seniors and the disabled.
"This is something that we're not going away on," Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) said after personally delivering the bills to Christie. "This isn't theater, this isn't a gimmick."
After the bills were vetoed, Sweeney said "we'll be back, governor."
Unimpressed, Christie said "All right, we'll see."
Fifteen paragraphs later:
Two-thirds of the members of both houses must vote to override a veto, meaning four Republicans in the Senate and seven in the Assembly would have to switch their votes. Legislative officials said they don't know when -- or if -- they will schedule a vote to override the veto.
#1
Christie has thrown down the opening gambit into the laps of the dems in the legislature. Christie is doing exactly what he said he would do, and what he ran for as governor. The question will be whether the legislators are willing to risk their offices to double dog dare him.
If they override the veto, they risk the wrath of the voters. Christie knows that this is the defining skirmish in the war. One step in getting the country back, one state at a time.
"Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/22/2010 12:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"This isn't theater, this isn't a gimmick."
Completely disconnected from reality. What they did is such a political move a child could see it. It's a wealth transfer. Plain and simple. Even the people who would benefit from it are probably sneering at the absurdity of this statement, even if they are perfectly happy to take the boodle.
If I were Christie, I'd be waving it in front of the voters' faces come election time, and asking them if they prefer idiots or liars or honest politicians in their legislature.
Very rarely anymore is legislation not subversive, theatrical, a gimmick, or full of intended "uninteded consequences", which usually has something to do with transferring wealth from the peasants into government or special interest coffers.
As dean, Kagan enjoyed something of a cult-like following among the students of Harvard Law School. She was charismatic and intimidating, and, most important, she gave students free coffee in the morning. She was also famous for her good-natured annihilation of unprepared students in her classroom. In fact, she had the three unofficial rules of Marine Corps leadership down pat: Be tough, show that you care and ensure that everyone below you has plenty of coffee.
If Elena Kagan is "anti-military," she certainly didn't show it. She treated the veterans at Harvard like VIPs, and she was a fervent advocate of our veterans association. She was decidedly against "don't ask, don't tell," but that never affected her treatment of those who had served. I am confident she is looking forward to the upcoming confirmation hearings as an opportunity to engage in some intellectual sparring with members of Congress over her Supreme Court nomination. I would respectfully warn them to do their homework, as she has a reputation for annihilating the unprepared.
trial attorney with the Department of Justice's Voting Rights Section has resigned, citing concerns about the government's refusal to prosecute a case involving voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party. A letter of resignation obtained by The Washington Examiner from a former Justice Department employee makes clear DOJ has refused to allow attorneys in the Voting Rights Section to testify before the congressionally-chartered bipartisan U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, despite subpoenas that could result in their being held in contempt.
In his letter of resignation, J. Christian Adams said:
On the other hand, the events surrounding the dismissal of United States v. New Black Panther Party, et al., after the trial team sought and obtained an entry of default, has subjected me, Mr. Christopher Coates, and potentially at some point, all members of the team, to a subpoena from the United States Commission on Civil Rights. The subpoena is based on an explicit federal statute and seeks answers about why the case was dismissed.
I have incurred significant personal expense in retaining a number of separate attorneys and firms regarding this subpoena in order to protect my interests and advise me about my personal legal obligation to comply with the subpoena. Over the last few months, one of my attorneys has had multiple communications with Federal Programs regarding the subpoena. My attorney suggested to them that the Department should file a motion in district court to quash the subpoena and thereby resolve conclusively any question about my obligation to comply.
Months ago, my attorney advised the Department that a motion to quash would be welcome, and that I would assert no objection to the motion. Further, my attorney has explicitly sought to ascertain whether Executive Privilege has been invoked regarding the decisions of individuals not in the Voting Section to order the dismissal of the case. If Executive Privilege has been asserted, or will be, obviously I would not comply with the subpoena. These options would provide some conclusive legal certainly about the extent of my obligation to comply with a subpoena issued pursuant to a federal statute. Instead, we have been ordered not to comply with the subpoena, citing a federal regulation (emphasis mine).
Adams also cites his knowledge of the criminal character and violent tendencies of' members of the New Black Panther Party, saying:
As you also know, the defendants in the New Black Panther lawsuit have become increasingly belligerent in their rhetoric toward the attorneys who brought the case. (See eg., April 23, 2010 statement of Malik Zulu Shabazz,http://www.newblackpanther.com/usccrphony case statement.pdf, describing the phony case' brought by the modern day racist lynch mob seeking to hang what [we] think .are [our] modern slaves.') Their grievances toward us generally echo the assertions that the facts and law did not support the lawsuit against them, ab initio. Knowing intimately the criminal character and violent tendencies of the members of New Black Panther Party, it is my profound hope that these assertions are tempered.
This follows the departure of another attorney, who before transferring to South Carolina, read a statement to a surprised goodbye luncheon' about his opposition to the way the case is handled (see here). More updates to follow. The document is below:
#1
Barry and Herr Holder are going to set back the cause of racial justice at least 50 years. This is going to break at the worst time for them and have serious repercussions in 2012.
#5
Our narcissist-in-chief will dump his milder alter-ego Holder only when necessary. They are one-and-the-same: Socialist tools who played the diversity and affirmative action card to get far above their competence-level
/sorry about all the hyphens. I have a FY quota to get rid of, like Paul2's !!!!'s
damn publishing budgets :-(
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/22/2010 20:12 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
