GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

News from the Swamp: Great Demo achievements

On the Hill: The House Judiciary Committee cited White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former legal counsel Harriet Miers for contempt of Congress for ignoring subpoenas to appear at hearings regarding the firing of eight U.S. attorneys in December. We’re shocked—shocked—to report that the 22-17 vote was along party lines. The White House invoked executive privilege in not allowing Bolten or Miers to testify, which didn’t serve the interest of the Democrats’ witch-hunt. The contempt charges, if they make it to court, will likely die there. Senate Democrats also subpoenaed White House aide Karl Rove in a perjury investigation against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Question for the Demos: Ever heard of crying wolf?

In the Senate, Russell Feingold (D-WI) is taking another shot at President George W. Bush by announcing a proposal to censure him and Vice President Dick Cheney for “misconduct related to the war in Iraq” and the administration’s “attack on the rule of law.” He first tried to rally his fellow libs in the Senate to give Bush a slap on the wrist last year regarding the terrorist-surveillance program, but they were too timid to follow.

This year may be different. Democrats are opening up new investigations on the administration all the time, with the battle to get the President taking up all their energy. Clearly, they are so hungry for revenge against… something, anything… that they have completely lost sight of the agenda they were bragging about back in January. So far, all the voters have seen is a minimum-wage hike (which took effect this week) that will hurt the economy if it does anything at all. Where did the healthcare and middle-class tax cuts go? And who’s ordering more subpoena forms?

Political spouses taken off the payroll

The House passed H.R. 2630, the “Campaign Expenditure Transparency Act,” which would amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit authorized committees and leadership PACs of a candidate or current federal-office holder from making payments to the individual’s spouse. It further requires such committees and PACs to report on disbursements made to the immediate family members of the individual. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), co-sponsor of the bill, said the practice, which is bipartisan and has gone on for years, “has shown the potential to foster corruption.” You don’t say. This rare attempt to tighten the spigot that feeds the trough now goes to the Senate, where its future does not look promising. Many legislators won’t admit it on camera, but they’re not fans of the bill. They believe some spouses and family members do a great deal of work, and should be paid. The Democrats’ “reforming” brush-stroke is indeed broad.

Welcome to Washington, Dr. Broun

A new member joins the House this week after winning a special election in Georgia’s 10th District to fill the seat vacated when Republican Rep. Charles Norwood died in February. Dr. Paul Broun won a run-off against Georgia State Sen. Jim Whitehead, who led the first primary vote with 44 percent to Broun’s 21 percent. After several campaign gaffes, including joking about bombing liberals at the University of Georgia, Whitehead succumbed to Broun. In addition to promising to carry a copy of the Constitution with him at all times for reference, Broun said he will apply four tests to each bill he votes on: Is it constitutional and a proper function of government? Is it morally correct? Is it something we really need? Is it something we can afford? “Today’s federal government is too big, too powerful and too expensive because it is doing things beyond the scope of what our Founders envisioned the national government should be doing,” he declared. “This is foolish and it is dangerous.” A few more congressmen like Dr. Broun would do quite well.

Another judicial nominee fight

Leslie Southwick is a nominee for a seat on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which due to the length of its vacancy has been declared an emergency. This means that Southwick, judged “well qualified” by the American Bar Association, needs to be voted on soon. However, Senate Judiciary Chair Pat Leahy (D-VT) and his fellow liberals at People for the American Way have accused Southwick of insensitivity for two Mississippi Appellate Court decisions he didn’t even write. The first case ruled that an employee should not lose his job for using a racial slur in the workplace because there was no disruption and the guilty party made an apology that was accepted. The second case used “anti-gay” terminology in a custody battle in which a child was awarded to the biological father over the mother, who was living in a homosexual relationship.

One good look at the subject and outcome of either of theses cases explains why liberals are stringing the best thread they can find to deny Southwick a seat on the Appeals Court. He is cut from conservative cloth and will not bend the Constitution to suit the multiculturalists.

New & notable legislation

The “John Doe” amendment, which protects airline passengers who report suspicious behavior in an effort to prevent terrorism, will receive a floor vote in both houses of Congress before the August recess. House Democrats had tried to derail the proposal.

The Senate voted 95-0 to implement new ethics guidelines for colleges and universities regarding federal scholarships and loans. Gifts of more than “nominal value” from lenders to college employees will no longer be permitted on ethics grounds, and colleges must now explain the “preferred” status of certain lenders. The Senate also passed legislation to increase direct student aid by $17.4 billion over five years, while decreasing subsidies to lenders by $18 billion over the same five years. Repayment options for students include not paying more than 15 percent of their discretionary income and forgiving the loan after about 20 years. Nothing like throwing gasoline on a fire.

Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) has been a valiant crusader for earmark reform, but his job is a tough one. Flake’s recent inquiry into a $1-million earmark in Rep. Jack Murtha’s district led to the discovery that the company slated to receive the cash may not even exist. Murtha is one of Congress’ most notorious porkers. This particular company has received millions of dollars over the years, but Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN), chairman of the earmark subcommittee, couldn’t verify its existence. Flake proposed to remove the earmark, but he was voted down 326 to 98.

The gravy train rolls along on another front: Amtrak will retain its $1.5-billion subsidy despite efforts by—you guessed it—Rep. Flake, to strike the expenditure. No word on subsidies for the horse-and-buggy industry.

The YouTube campaign

Democrat presidential candidates answered questions posted on YouTube this week in another hyped attempt by CNN to grab ratings. Most of the questions came from left of center, which was no surprise, and most questions far outshone the answers. True colors started to show in the answers of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama eagerly stated that, as president, he would meet unconditionally with the leaders of Iran, North Korea, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela. Clinton, however, rejected Obama’s useful-idiot position as naive, stating that she would not want to be used as propaganda. They have been fighting ever since.

Even while the two top candidates tangle with each other, they have wasted no time pandering for more support. Obama called on The National Council of La Raza (The Race) to support his campaign because he has supported theirs. La Raza supports complete amnesty for illegal aliens as well as the reconquista movement, which aims to flood the American southwest with Mexicans, essentially “reconquering” the land.

Something is working well for the Democrats, though, because they are winning the money campaign hands down. Democrat national candidates, along with the DNC, have raised $389 million so far this year. By contrast, the GOP has raised $287 million. The top candidates are Hillary Clinton ($63 million), Barack Obama ($59 million) and Mitt Romney ($44 million).

Perhaps Republicans would do well to emulate the Manchester (NH) Republican Committee, which will hold a fundraiser next month to include arming supporters with Uzis, M-16 rifles and other automatic weapons for target practice. Sounds like a winner to us!

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

“This is actually not hard, this is fun. The biggest problem is my butt hurts. Is that normal?” —John Edwards talking about (we assume) bike riding with Lance Armstrong in Iowa

File this under what James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal would call “Great Orators of the Democratic Party.”

NATIONAL SECURITY

Warfront with Jihadistan: Bush responds

In response to the Democrats’ “debate” Monday night in Charleston, South Carolina, President Bush on Tuesday made a speech at Charleston Air Force Base about the reasons we are in Iraq. He reiterated, “The key lesson of September 11 is that the best way to protect Americans is to go on offense, to fight the terrorists overseas so we don’t have to face them here at home.” He chided Democrats and their accomplices in the Leftmedia for denying the real connection between Osama bin Laden’s al-Qa’ida and al-Qa’ida in Iraq (or, as The New York Times insists on obfuscating, “al-Qa’ida in Mesopotamia”). Those in Congress attempting to usurp the duties of the Commander in Chief continue to “ignore the clear consequence of such a retreat,” the President added.

In Iraq, the surge continues to work as both Iraqi Sunnis and Shi’ites tire of the violence perpetrated by al-Qa’ida and begin more and more to help American forces. Operation Phantom Thunder is the largest operation since the initial invasion and is an open-ended mission to clear out various terrorist cells. Meanwhile, Operation Arrowhead Ripper secured the city of Baqubah in Diyala province. Gen. David Petraeus is working to attack the jihadis nearly simultaneously all over Iraq in an effort to keep them constantly on the run. It seems to be working, though Katie Couric won’t tell you so. The military’s current plan includes staying in Iraq at least until 2009.

The Leftmedia’s dezinformatsia has been so effective that, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, six in ten Americans say, “To heck with the Constitution, the Commander in Chief and military leaders on the ground in Iraq—let the Democrats in Congress run the war!”

This week’s ‘Alpha Jackass’ award

“One of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the [Middle East] forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they’re going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses. They have been acting irresponsibly up until this point.” —Barack Obama, whose grand plan once we cut and run is to turn Iraq over to Iran and Syria, the two countries doing the most to aid the enemy

The BIG lie: John Kerry on fleeing Iraq

Our old friend John Kerry made it back into the news this week with his usual verbal antics, stemming from his “seared” memory. Arguing for American defeat in Iraq, Kerry said, “We heard that argument over and over again about the bloodbath that would engulf the entire Southeast Asia, and it didn’t happen” (emphasis added). He claimed also that American presence in Iraq only makes the situation worse every day.

In the interest of equal time and fairness, here’s a summary of what The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto dug up regarding what happened after America abandoned Vietnam: According to the Orange County Register in 2001, some one million people were imprisoned without formal charges or trials; 165,000 people died in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam’s “re-education” camps; Thousands were abused or tortured; and Prisoners were incarcerated for as long as 17 years, according to the U.S. Department of State, with most terms ranging from three to ten years.

In Laos, tens of thousands were sent to “re-education” camps and an unknown number died. In Cambodia, according to the Christian Science Monitor, “more than 1.7 million of Cambodia’s 8 million inhabitants perished from disease, starvation, overwork, or outright execution in a notorious genocide” perpetrated by the infamous Khmer Rouge. John Kerry claims to have supplied weapons to the Khmer Rouge during his four-month tour in Vietnam.

Next time he’s asked if he told the truth about post-war Vietnam, Kerry should reply, “It didn’t happen.”

Profiles of valor: Air Force Staff Sgt. Albietz

Having served as the leader of a bomb-disposal team at Kirkuk Regional Air Base in Iraq, Air Force Staff Sgt. Edward Albietz of Pinellas Park, Florida, is accustomed to putting his life on the line daily. The father of two young children, Albietz has served with the Air Force for eight years and was stationed in the Middle East up until late last year.

While in Iraq, Albietz was responsible for the discovery and disarming of explosive devices located within a 16,000-square-mile area. During one mission in Sulayman Bak, Albietz’s team had to find and deactivate four pressure-switch-activated explosives that were planted around government buildings. The team was successful in its mission, and countless military and civilian lives were saved as a result of their efforts.

Other missions have involved dismantling explosives while under insurgent attack. In all, Albietz is credited with destroying more than 40,000 bombs that resulted in saving innumerable lives. For his courageous efforts in Iraq, he was recently awarded the Bronze Star for “exceptionally meritorious conduct.”

On the immigration front: New Haven, CT

A program that would grant an identification card for New Haven, Connecticut’s estimated 10-15 thousand illegal aliens went into effect this week. The card will allow “undocumented” aliens to open bank accounts and have access to other services that require a legal ID. The program was approved by city officials last month in a 25-1 vote but has met criticism from those who see it as an attempt to circumvent federal law.

The city claims that the program is an effort to grant equality for all and a solution to the nation’s immigration woes. “The city’s not trying to set its own foreign policy here; what’s happening is we’re dealing with a failing national immigration policy,” said New Haven Mayor John DeStefano.

The Southern Connecticut Immigration Reform group has, under the Freedom of Information Act, already requested the names of individuals in the program’s database. While it’s yet to be seen whether the city will grant such a request, local newspapers report that such disclosure would likely be made only for the purposes of a “criminal investigation.” Clearly, in the minds of New Haven officials, illegally crossing the border doesn’t fall into that category. In the rousing words of the illegal aliens who witnessed the passage of New Haven’s immigration reform policy, “Si, se puede” (Yes, we can!).

New Haven’s neighbors in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, were rebuked by a judge yesterday as he struck down as unconstitutional a city law that fines businesses and landlords who hire or rent to illegal aliens. The law was passed in 2006 in a city overrun with an illegal population—one third of residents are immigrants, and about one quarter of those are illegal.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats defeated a Republican attempt to add $3 billion to border-security funds, while counter-proposing to grant amnesty to illegal aliens in the agriculture business.

Free the Border Patrol agents—now!

Please take a moment to sign Free the Texas Three and Secure our Borders, a petition calling on President Bush to commute the sentences of both former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean and their colleague, former Sheriff’s Deputy Guillermo Hernandez; asking Congress to insist that the DEA prosecute Mexican national Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila on felony drug distribution charges; and demanding that Congress and the Bush administration secure our borders.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Income Redistribution File: Dead farmers’ money

If you weren’t already convinced that farm subsidies are a major drain on American taxpayers, here’s a story that will curdle your milk: According to a recent investigation by the Government Accountability Office, the Agriculture Department distributed over $1 billion in subsidies to dead farmers between 1999 and 2005. “It’s unconscionable that the Department of Agriculture would think that a dead person was actively involved in the business of farming,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), who pushed for the audit. The report cites failure on the part of the USDA to conduct checks to ensure “the estates were kept open to receive these payments.”

The USDA disputes the GAO’s findings, claiming that the audit does not explicitly prove fraudulent dealings in the disbursement process. Such claims seem doubtful considering that the USDA depends on the farmer’s heirs or estates to notify them in the event of a death. We only wish that we could have as much faith in government programs as the USDA appears to have in its beneficiaries.

Regulatory Commissars: Oil refineries

Democrats’ hugely successful 30-year war against “Big Oil” has prevented energy producers from building a single new oil refinery, which in turn has resulted in insufficient refinery capacity despite management’s desire to maximize production when energy prices and consumer demand are both high. The bottleneck was also exacerbated when refiners deferred maintenance to take advantage of the high prices over the last several years, and from natural disasters which have doubled the refinery disruptions to 1.5 million barrels a day. A gallon of gas is now averaging more than $3.

The natural consequences of liberals’ ban on new refineries, imposition of burdensome environmental regulations to phase out additives except ethanol, and mandating ultra-low sulfur standards have created a gridlock of refining capacity which results in high energy prices. “Hanlon’s Razor” cautions against attributing to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. With the inadequacies of government-run meddling in the energy market, that may be a distinction without a difference.

Healthcare badgering

Impatient to unleash government-run healthcare nirvana on Wisconsin, the state’s Democrats dispensed with slow expansion of government intrusion and opted for a massive takeover of the state’s healthcare system with a plan to insure all residents under 65.

Currently being marketed by the state’s liberals as a “free” near-universal healthcare, with allusions to vague and undefined greater economic efficiency, the plan’s colossal tax increase will make Wisconsin’s budget 125 percent larger by reaping an additional $15 billion from the already highly taxed population. With a targeted uninsured population of over 276,000 who have lacked coverage for more than one year, the annual price tag is somewhat more than $54,000 per uninsured (12 times more expensive than private insurance!). Due to the plan’s open-enrollment feature, inviting an influx of Wisconsin residents who may be seriously ill, and the anticipated cost shifting from pricy, benefit-rich local government and union plans, the ultimate taxpayer burden may skyrocket. The state’s tax levy would exceed the federal government’s tax burden regardless of a built-in taxation escalator clause. So much for “free.”

Britain urged to supersize ‘fat tax’

Recent Oxford-led UK research published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health has confirmed, naturally, that Big Brother knows best. The research team investigated whether a more inclusive “fat tax” —consisting of higher taxes on foods deemed unhealthy—could improve Britain’s national health. The country already has a 17.5 percent tax on ice cream, soft drinks and other snacks; however, the study suggests that by gerrymandering the food pyramid to include other dairy, dessert and meat products in the tax scheme, the populace will lose pounds thanks to the economic dis-incentive. No doubt their wallets will be lighter by a few pounds as well (pun intended).

Inequality and happiness

As it turns out, John Edwards’ two Americas do exist. However, they are distinguished not by rich and poor but by fact and fantasy. According to Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks, to accept the Left’s mantra of the injustice of economic inequality is to ignore the facts. Brooks notes that, contrary to the liberal assertion that income inequality angers the have-nots, people actually “tended rather to hope that their kids might become the next Bill Gates.” He writes, “[T]he evidence reveals that it is not economic inequality that frustrates Americans. Rather, it is a perceived lack of opportunity.”

If the Left’s equating of economic inequality with unhappiness were based in reality, Brooks continues, then happiness should be declining. Yet, amid widening income gaps, the National Opinion Research Center’s General Social Survey (GSS) found that in 1973, 30 percent of Americans were “very happy;” in 1982, 31 percent; in 1993, 32 percent; and in 2004, 31 percent.

Not surprisingly, the survey found happiness more prevalent among those who accept the possibility of economic mobility. Could this mean people prefer equality of opportunity to equality of results? The pursuit of happiness rather than its guarantee? Perhaps our Founding Fathers were onto something after all.

CULTURE

Jimmy Carter and ‘The Elders’

To mark his 89th birthday, former South African President Nelson Mandela announced the launch of a global Council of Elders, a group boasting the alleged sagacity of nearly a thousand years’ life experience and the belief that it can save the world. Backed in part by the resoundingly effective United Nations, “The Elders” is the brainchild of businessman Richard Branson and musician Peter Gabriel.

Unfettered by incidental considerations like national interest or, as Elder Jimmy Carter put it, “very intense pressures from our own constituencies,” the Council aims to tackle “conflict, AIDS and global warming.” Somehow, Islamic terrorism escaped this list of major world problems, though Carter has offered his services as a mediator between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestinian conflict.

Other Council members include former Foreign Minister for Communist China Li Zhaoxing, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and Muslim economist Muhammad Yunus. Branson claims the Council will be “above partisan politics,” but Conan O’Brien offered the more immediate observation that “The Elders will be like the Fantastic Four, but with bladder problems.”

From the Village Academic Curriculum File

Ward Churchill, the ultra left-wing University of Colorado Ethnic Studies Professor, has finally gotten what he deserves: the boot. Churchill had previously questioned the innocence of the civilians who died in the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11, arguing that the “little Eichmanns” deserved to be killed. His attorney is predictably filing a lawsuit against the University, ridiculously asserting that Churchill’s First Amendment rights have been violated. Although Churchill may have the right to expose his ignorance to the world, it does not follow that the University of Colorado is obligated to continue to employ him. Furthermore, the professor was fired on the grounds of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. It should not be surprising that someone who would make such idiotic and insulting claims would also be dishonest. University president Hank Brown said that three investigative panels found “a pattern of serious, deliberate and repeated research misconduct that fell below minimum standards of professional integrity” in Churchill’s work.

As usual, groups such as the ACLU that typically engage in backstabbing cowardice toward the American way of life are backing Churchill. Although Churchill’s ignorance may appear aberrant for an individual with an advanced degree, his views are not atypical of many college professors. A surprisingly high percentage of our nation’s professors are not honest academics engaged in the education of students, but rather are liberals who saturate students with biased and subjective opinion masquerading as fact, all in the name of education.

Around the nation: Inmate sues CA prison system

An inmate at Folsom State Prison in California, according to the Associated Press, “is suing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for emotional distress and violating her constitutional right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.” The real problem, however, is that “she” is a he. Alexis Giraldo is “transgendered” and takes hormones to look more feminine. Other inmates at the prison have assaulted Giraldo, and his lawyer likens the situation to “throwing a fresh piece of meat into a lion’s cage.” The AP goes on to complain about the draconian way that California prisons assign inmates “based on their genitalia rather than physical appearance.” Uh… maybe that’s because sitting a convict down to discuss whether or not he feels like a man today is not the most effective way to protect female prisoners from assault if a guy gets “creative” and ends up at a women’s prison.

‘Wrongful birth’ suit in Florida

A Florida couple was awarded more than $21 million for the “wrongful birth” of their son. He was misdiagnosed in the womb and has suffered from Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome, disabling the production or synthesis of cholesterol. The couple’s older son also has the disorder and neither is able to communicate, needing constant extraordinary care. The couple claimed that had their second son been correctly diagnosed, they would have aborted him. We would somberly suggest that parents who are willing to sue because they would have killed their child when it was legal, but now can’t, are not in the least fit to be parents.

And last…

Just before last November’s national elections, Newsweek published a front-cover declaration “We’re Losing”—a stupefyingly ignorant essay by the magazine’s international edition editor, Fareed Zakaria, given further weight by the endorsement of its editor in chief, Jon Meacham. That essay purported to know more about strategy in Iraq than our best military and civilian analysts.

Not to be outdone, Time magazine’s cover story for the week of 27 July shows a helicopter lifting an “A” for “America” out of I-R-A-Q and features more “tuck-tail and retreat” rhetoric by Time’s assistant managing editor, Michael Duffy.

Proving that irony can come from any angle, however, the helicopter depicted on the Time cover is not one of ours, but a Soviet-era Mi-24 “Hind” gunship.

One may assume, as with the Newsweek story, that Time’s editorial staff knows so little about the military that nobody spotted the sloppy error. The cover raises other questions. For example, does Time suggest that Leftists, who are calling for a U.S. retreat from Iraq, are throwbacks from the Soviet era? Are they awaiting yet another fall of “Saigon”?

Perhaps Time, Newsweek and other antiquated Leftmedia rags should stick to what they know best—keeping us posted on the latest shenanigans from Rosie, Paris and Lindsay.

Veritas vos Liberabit—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot’s editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families—especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)