Pelosi To Visit Syria

Nancy Pelosi really does think she's President.

"WASHINGTON (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will visit Syria, a country President Bush has shunned as a sponsor of terrorism, despite
being asked by the administration not to go.

"In our view, it is not the right time to have these sort of high- profile
visitors to Syria," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters Friday.

Pelosi arrived in Israel on Friday in what is her second fact-finding trip
to the Middle East since taking over leadership in the House in January.

Her repeat trip, an indication she plans to play a role in foreign policy,
is also a direct affront to the administration, which says such diplomatic
overtures by lawmakers can do more harm than good....."

Syria's more than welcome to keep her, too.

Pension Piggies

This certainly won't be the last hike. Here piggy, piggy!

The Massachusetts Board of Retirement agreed yesterday to hike pensions of
about eight of the 17 active and retired college presidents who asked for the
increases to mirror a boost that former University of Massachusetts president
William Bulger won in court.

In November, the Supreme Judicial Court
boosted Bulger's annual pension by $17,000, to $196,000, after factoring in his
housing allowance. State pensions are calculated based on a percentage of the
average of a worker's top three earning years before retirement.
The 17 other
college presidents had asked that their housing allowance be counted as salary
in calculating their pension.

"We made the decision based on the Bulger decision, which said housing
allowance can and should be factored into a pension," said state Treasurer
Timothy Cahill, who chairs the board.
The pension board agreed to set a
retroactive date of July 2002 to begin factoring in the housing allowance.
That's when the board was first notified about the issue.

About 8 of the 17 presidents retired after July 2002 and will be eligible
for the higher pensions.
Among the former or active college presidents who
requested an increase is former Holyoke Community College president David
Bartley, who asked for a $12,000 increase of his $138,000 annual pension.
Bartley retired in 2004.

Not to be crass here, but why is it Treasurer Tim Cahill is a complete and total pussy about everything he's involved with? If Cahill wants to be Governor someday, and let's be honest, if Deval Patrick continues on the road he's on, he may have a shot at the Donk nomination in 2010, then he should step up to the plate for the tax payers and put his foot down. That would make a statement. He should file a counter suit to this or do SOMETHING other than roll over and scream "uncle!!!!"

As for Billy Bulger.. how the feds haven't caught him or jailed him yet is completely beyond me. No one has done more to spit in the face of tax payers than Bulger. Not Dukakis, not King, not that cross-eyed vegtable Tommy Taxes or anyone. It goes to show how backwards your state is when someone like Bulger can get away with what he's gotten away with.

Why the MassGOP hasn't been, isn't, and perhaps will never be all over this, is a tragedy.

Hillary's Vagina v. Grumpy/Primped/Gigolo

Tony Blankley, on the inevitability of President Hillary Rodham Clinton:

With every passing week it becomes more likely that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Party nominee for president. This thought, alone, should provide the strongest possible motivation to the Bush Administration and the Washington Republicans to get their acts together so that the eventual Republican nominee for president doesn't start the general election campaign in too deep a hole.

That's probably not going to happen. When at any time in the past two years has the Bush Administration had its act together? The congress are too busy trying to run away to ever notice Clinton moving behind them within length of a telephone chord.

The polls that show half the country saying they won't vote for Hillary should be discounted. At the election, the choice will not be Hillary or not Hillary -- it will be Hillary or someone else. And that is what the campaign is about. ...

Moreover, Hillary's strengths are not yet as appreciated as they will be. Don't get me wrong, personally I find her and her candidacy detestable as the worst form of unprincipled, ruthless, nihilistic, mud-throwing demagogic politics. But for the Democratic Party electorate (and some Independents and soft Republicans) her apparent strengths will become more persuasive.

For example, the same 'strengths' that the donk congressional candidates had this year, like, uh, not being Republicans. Even more, she's the polar opposite of George W. Bush.
And, you know, Clintons always, um, pound Bushes.

Currently she suffers by the media's focus on her lack of spontaneity, charm or pleasant voice - particularly when compared with Obama and, to some extent, Edwards. But charm is not the only path to the American voter. Richard Milhouse Nixon won more national elections than any politician in our history (two vice presidents, three presidential nominations and two presidencies - three if you count the stolen 1960 election against Kennedy). He didn't have any charm - but he was smart, shrewd, highly political, hard working and ruthless. Sometimes the voters are looking for what they think is competence rather than a love affair.

Well, Tony, you should triple underline 'ruthless'. Hillary's a lot like Nixon, but the biggest difference between them is whereas Nixon's ruthlessness was incompetent, Hillary and the rest of the Clinton Workshop are, well, well oiled to say the least. That machine ran roughshod over every scandal pursuer and rings around the poor, stupid, hapless GOP for eight nearly intolerable years.

And no doubt, she's 'nowhere near as charming as her husband' and 'has all of her husband's slickness and none of the salesmanship that allowed him to get away with it,' she's got two huge advantages:

1.) A Vagina

2.) She's Not a Republican

The first will be so mind-blowingly intimidating to the second, that whoever the 'he' is that gets to face her, he won't DARE think of waging the kind of campaign she's guaranteed to. The media will do plenty to insulate her as well. It won't matter what he says or does; he's going to be gobbled up by her cult of personality, and the overwhelming power of her preemptive coronational procession. It doesn't matter who it is. It doesn't matter if it's jowly flavor of the week Fred Thompson. It doesn't matter if it's primped as a poodle Mitt Romney. It doesn't matter if it's Rudy Giuliani, male gigolo. Just like that Rick Lazio did in their 2000 Senate race, they'll spend months needlessly justifying or apologizing for the fact that they, too, don't have vaginas.

The Center Right will stay home because they'll just be frustrated. "Independents" will be dazzled by her 'competence', her hand-waving, and unmatched Bush hatred. Oh and like here in Massachusetts with Deval Patrick's blackness, they'll swoon for her, well the novelty of electing a woman to the presidency. The Cook-wing of the Donk party will be rustling themselves out of tequila comas and dragging themselves out of their organic gardens to exact the ultimate revenge for the 200 election.

Congressional Republicans need to stop treating the base of their party like they have AIDS. If they continue on the path they're on, the 2008 election is over. Period.

If Reagan could be resurrected or genetically cloned, he'd have a shot at the Vagina in '08, but none of the actual candidates, as of right now, really has a prayer. They don't have a vagina. Voters are that shallow and the Clintons will play right to it. They're the Washington Generals to Hillary's Harlem Globetrotters. If the movie Rocky were real, it would be like what would happen if Rocky faced Apollo creed for real. They're beaten. The media's playing coy with her for now, but give it some time and they'll prop her fallopian tubes up on a mantle an worship them. For now, These guys have all been beaten, and they don't even know it.

Well, McCain probably does....

These idiots need to wake up.

And the Train Keeps On a Rollin'

The Deval Patrick administration LITERALLY can't get through a day without something ridiculous happening. This was in today's Globe.

Two commissioners on the state's quasi judicial labor relations board are accusing Governor Deval Patrick's chief labor aide of interfering with the agency on cases involving two unions that endorsed Patrick and donated heavily to his gubernatorial campaign.

The two commissioners, Paul T. O'Neill and Hugh L. Reilly, asserted in interviews with the Globe that Suzanne M. Bump made an inappropriate call about a case involving the Boston Teachers Union and pressured the commission to approve a pending petition by Service Employees International Union, Local 1199.

Of course, Bump and company denied it.

"There is not a single instance of my telling them to make a decision on anything," said Bump, a former legislator from Braintree who served as Patrick's liaison with labor during the campaign.

In late January, O'Neill and Reilly said, Bump made an irate phone call to commission chairman John F. Jesensky after the agency made its initial ruling that the Boston Teachers Union was violating the law with its threats to call a strike. They said she complained to him that she had not been given notice before the decision was made in the case.

Bump "clearly communicated her extreme displeasure, and we clearly got the message that she was unhappy," O'Neill said in an interview this week. Jesensky, who was also appointed by Romney, declined to comment, but O'Neill and Reilly said the chairman briefed them on the call.

About a week later, O'Neill and Reilly said, during a review of the commission's budget, Bump expressed strong support for a petition pending before the commission by Service Employees International Union, Local 1199, which spent more than $600,000 last year in support of Patrick's candidacy.

Under state law, the Labor Relations Commission is an independent, quasi judicial panel that resolves labor disputes and enforces state labor laws. The commission falls within Bump's agency for budgetary reason, but under statute is "in no respect subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

The two commissioners said Bump's discussion of the SEIU contract and the teachers dispute constituted "inappropriate" interference. Reilly said it also raises "ethical improprieties." O'Neill said the agency plans to take their complaint to the governor.

The Deval Patrick Administration is truly the gift that keeps on giving.

"Negro Magic"?

One must wonder if the following montage of headlines is worth it to Barack Obama to become Hillary Clinton's vice president:

Obama's kin owned slaves - A genealogical report finds two slave owners among the candidate's U.S. ancestors (on his white mother's side of the family, natch)

Is Obama the new 'black'? - Barack Obama is a rising star. He's a powerful speaker and a gifted writer. He is the only African American serving in the U.S. Senate. But is he black?

That's what New York Daily News columnist Stanley Crouch asked last month, and his answer was decidedly "no." No, Crouch wasn't just employing the old "blacker than thou" canard. Nor was he concerned with the fact that Obama was raised by his white mother. Rather, he was treating blackness not just as a racial (shared biology) identity but as an ethnic (shared historical experience) one. And isn't that what the switch of terms from "black" to "African American" was all about?...

What Crouch is arguing is that what the majority of black Americans share is their ancestors' experience as human chattel, brought to these shores in the grips of chains. Slavery and segregation not only forged a rigid racial line between black and white but created a shared ethnic experience. For Crouch, the fact that Obama's father — whom Obama met only once — was a black Kenyan who came to the U.S. to study at Harvard and the University of Hawaii removes him from the traditional black American narrative.

Author and essayist Debra Dickerson agrees. She believes that much of Obama's popularity among whites stems from the fact that his family wasn't part of the slave experience and therefore elicits no feelings of historical guilt. "The swooning from white people is a paroxysm of self-congratulation," she said.

Come on, folks. Slavery ended almost 145 years ago. We stopped the whole stupidity of segregation 43 years ago. Unfortunately, the oppression of black Americans continues even today, in the form of self-imposed (leftist) racist pathology that can't be let go of or left in the rear view mirror and is about as relevant to today's black Americans as the Norman conquest of England is to their white countrymen. As the old saying goes: "You can't go forward unless you first stop looking back." In terms of race, this is akin to advocating for the holocaust to the political left. After all, if Donks starting doing that, we might actually become a colorblind society in which the content of one's character matters more than the color of one's skin, and black voters might start thinking for themselves instead of believing most of those tasteless anti-Republican/anti-conservative lies, and the Democrats might lose their iron clad grip hold on Afro-Americans and the national political viability that goes with it. And we certainly can't have THAT.

Historical guilt". Would be better described as "collective guilt." No, worse than that - racial guilt. Whites "swoon" over Barack Obama because all whites are racists because some whites inflicted slavery on some blacks in centuries past. But Obama isn't "really black" because his ancestors were genuinely "African" and not "African-American," never slaves but rather....well, never slaves, anyway. At least not in the sense of being owned by white people. And because he's, you know, an "Oreo". Or "zebra". His blood done be pluted by honky cracker genes.

Come on, folks. Don't look at me like that. I'm just trying to amplify the spirit of how the political left, which we all know, could never be racist, is talking about Obama. The dialogue is cluttered with mindless chit chat over the not so subtle but consistent theme:

TIME: Is Obama Black Enough?

LA Times: Some wonder: Is Obama black enough?

Maybe it's me, but I don't think I could possibly think of a more blatantly and perhaps more patently and blanket racist question than these. Imagine the furor over a conservative asking such a question!

How, aside from being bi-racial, is Barack Obama "not black enough"? One would have to figure that it had to do with something more than not being the decedent of a slave right? Is it because, he's well, eloquent, highly charismatic and uh, educated? Do black men forfeit their supposed 'blackness' when they drop their victim hood and do something with their lives?

Stop it! Stop looking at me like I'm a royal jerk-face. I'm not the guy saying Obama isn't 'black enough'. To me, it's just the usual overtly racist crap that flies from the left, but to them, it's a real 'test of faith' so to speak. And since libs can get away with saying ANYthing, that would explain this next quote, in which David Ehrenstein of the L.A. Times gives this crypto-Klan rhetoric an astonishing and appalling label:

As ever carbon-based life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.

But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

WAIT WHAT!? "Magic Negro"!? "Magic Negro". If Ann Coulter ever used that phrase we'd be picking her off the bottom of the Connecticut River. I can't think of a GOP member who would touch it with ten feet long tongs? It's too nuclear. It would end his or her political career in a heartbeat. The very same Left that has impunity to toss off such racial epithets would fall upon that hapless pachyderm and strip every last speck of PR meat from his/her bones in a self-righteous feeding frenzy of hyper-moralistic indignation. Anyone on the right using the term would have 'revealed their inherent racism' but a liberal doing that kind of stuff is, well, who cares.

Me, I figure Barack Obama is "black enough" based on his hyper-NeoBolshevik voting record. The Left will like him because he's good at doing what he's told. That's sort of what the left likes out of their minority "constituents"). However, he's really brought nothing to national politics and the only reason he's running for the Oval Office so early in his career is because he has some incredibly unique political traits all rolled up into a nice Afro-American package. Oddly enough, even that isn't enough to even the folks who should support him more than anyone.

But it will be enough to get him on the '08 Donk ticket with Mrs. Clinton, who will need all the "Negro magic" she can get.

Governor Patrick Coming to Western Mass To Hammer Legislators

In an effort to turn up the heat on state legislators who aren't supporting taxes on new businesses, Deval Patrick's going to be touring the state having more of those silly town meeting moonbat pow-wows to push his new policy. In fact, he's planning on 'suggesting' names of some legislators who need to be 'lobbied' according to Mass Live. That'll go over like a fart in church.

"At the outset, we believe that our supporters and supporters of these ideas ought to be talking to their own legislators," Patrick said late yesterday afternoon. "As we do our own polling and we develop a sense of who is supportive and who is on the fence and who's elsewhere, then we'll be targeting particular legislators - you bet."

Patrick said he hopes legislators don't resent it.

Call me crazy, but I think they will. Just a tad.

Petrolati said yesterday it would be counterproductive to effectively raise taxes on businesses, especially when the state's economy is slowing.

"What I'm hearing is that people don't want new taxes," Petrolati said.

For once in my life, I agree with Tommy Petrolati. Hell is chilly tonight. While Patrick is partly right that many legislators are out of touch with their districts, on this particular issue (business taxes), most aren't, which is a political anomaly in this state.

Really though, what happened to "Together" We Can? Deval's made himself enough enemies in these early months. It probably wouldn't serve him well to make more.

DevalPatrick.com raises privacy issues

Looks like ABC-5 in Boston has picked up on the sham of Deval Patrick's "Civic Engagement" web site as well.

Team 5 Investigates Janet Wu discovered that when people register to participate, it discloses their home address as listed in the Massachusetts voter database. Wu found that anyone could enter a name and a town and find the street address for any registered voter. For some searches, unpublished phone numbers were revealed.
Team 5 Investigates entered the name of a woman with a restraining order against a stalker. Her full address popped up on the Patrick campaign Web site.


Galvin said that he is concerned about privacy issues and worried about misuse of the information.

"I think we're all concerned about people's private information getting public. Just to be clear, this information did not come from my office," said Galvin. "We know elderly voters in particular (are) concerned about people finding their address, what apartment they're in."

Can you say privacy issues?

Morningstar said if anyone has a complaint to lodge, she welcomes them to go online and register their concerns, but she said the campaign has no intention of taking down the new page

Dear Miss Morningstar,

I'll go online so you can voter ID me, maybe even make a contribution, and file my complaint. Thanks for all your 'help'.

best,
Afternoon moon

Buckle up folks, it's going to be a long four years.

More Legislative Double Standards

They win an election, promising to bring honor back to Washington. Now, they break a promise not to hold votes "open" past the alloted time. Some background:

On their first day in the majority in January, Democrats amended the House rules to mandate that a vote "shall not be held open for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome of such vote."

Under earlier GOP rule, Democrats routinely attacked Republicans for extending the voting time, often citing the 2003 vote on the Medicare prescription drug bill that was famously held open three hours. And Hoyer himself was one of their foremost critics.

A quote from Hoyer:

"House Republican leaders proved once again today that they will stop at virtually nothing to win a vote, even if that means running roughshod over the most basic principles of democracy such as letting members vote their conscience and calling the vote after the allotted time has elapsed," Hoyer said.

"They ought to be ashamed of themselves, but when it comes to holding votes open and twisting the arms of their own members they clearly have no shame,’’ he went on. “These back-alley tactics have no place in the greatest deliberative body in the world. They might be the lifeblood of the tin-horn dictator, but not a world leader. It's an embarrassment.”

So what does Hoyer say today?

Asked Wednesday night whether Democrats would keep to the time limit, Hoyer paused, then pointed out that many votes can run a few minutes longer for various reasons. Pressed further by a reporter who pointed out that Democrats themselves had often criticized Republicans on this very point, Hoyer said, "It won't be open three hours. How about that?"

"How about 30 minutes?" the reporter asked.

"I won't guarantee it," Hoyer replied.

Also missing from the Democrats campaign promises-results. Prior to the election, Ms. Pelosi offered 6 things that would be changed by Democrats in the first 100 hours of the new session. To date, the Democrats are 0-6. I recall what a big deal was made about the Democrats getting things thru the House in 50 or 60 hours-but where are they now?

Perhaps we should hold some Senate hearings to see if the Democrats lied to the American people..

When All Else Fails, Campaign, Campaign, Campaign!

Looks like Deval tried the whole governing thing and figured out pretty quickly he sort of sucked at it. So...*sigh* Back to the campaign!

If it ever really ended.....

On Saturday, Patrick began a series of eight "town meeting" style forums across the state designed to help him rally loyal backers to push back against the established politicians and lobbyists he says are trying to undermine his agenda.

"It's you're government. It's your civic responsibility. And it's your moment in time," Patrick told the crowd, made up largely of well-wishers, who turned out to hear him.

Also Saturday, Patrick's campaign staff launched a revamped web site designed to make it easier for average citizens to pitch ideas to Patrick.

Patrick's efforts to remind his supporters why they backed him as a candidate comes as he struggles with the realities of governing and tries to recover from some of his early blunders -- including his decision to upgrade his official car to a Cadillac and redecorate his office with pricey drapes.

It seems the campaign never ends. It's got it's own web site, a place to make a 'contribution' and everything. No, not the kind of 'civic engagement' contribution, try campaign contribution. There are locations where he'll be stumping, policy stances and lots of nice pictures of everyone wearing burkas, doo rags, Red Sox hats and more.

Welcome to the new world of never ending campaigns in Massachusetts.

This little quote was my favorite:

"Show up. Make your voice heard. Nobody's giving us anything," he said. "Governing is about power, there's no mistaking that, and my power has never come from the insiders with connections and the powerful special interests, my power comes from you."

Apparently it's our fault that he doesn't have an agenda of any kind. What a steaming pile.

Oink, Oink

How or why can anyone justify adding to fmr. Senate President Billy Bulger's pension? Treasurer Tim Cahill announced yesterday that retired college Presidents would be receiving substantial increases in their pensions.... even thought they don't need it.

According to Cahill, the five-member state Board of Retirement will meet Thursday to take up requests from 16 retired and active college presidents seeking to benefit from former University of Massachusetts President William M. Bulger's legal victory in November to boost his pension by $17,000.
Former Holyoke Community College President David M. Bartley and former Springfield Technical Community College President Andrew M. Scibelli applied to increase their annual pensions by between $12,000 and $15,000, Cahill said. The board will probably vote unanimously to approve the requests, along with similar bids by other current and former college presidents, Cahill said.

"I don't think any of them need it," Cahill said. However, he added, "It's certainly theirs as much as it was Bulger's."

Bartley's current pension is $137,566; Scibelli's is $136,522.

Tiny Tim..... if they don't need it, THEN STEP IN AND TELL SOMEONE THAT! I thought this state was a little strapped for cash or is it only strapped for cash whenever someone other than a Democrat needs some extra dough in their retirement fund? Kind of like how we were strapped for cash when Mitt Romney wanted to use State Police helicopters to help local police in Boston and the state legislature turned around and said the idea was nuts because we didn't have the money to do it. Deval Patrick suggested doing the exact same thing the other day and now he's a genius.

I'm seriously beginning to question the sanity of the people of this state that they'll just let their public officials not only enforce a ridiculous double standard, but steal this much from tax payers. This is a complete travesty and level headed (and even some not so level headed) people everywhere should be appalled.

Shocked, Almost Awed

Take a look at this piece from the Lowell Sun.

Treasonous!?!? What has the editorial board been smoking at the Lowell Sun lately? And I mean that in the nicest way possible. The same Editorial board that staunchly defended outgoing congressman Marty Meehan (D-Massachusetts) unloaded on the Democrats' War appropriations bill, which by the way, is stuffed with pork.

Take a read, you may not believe it.

I'm sure that hundred million or so for Spinach will be of great aid to the troops in Iraq:

The Cruelest of Ironies

Some might not exactly like the fact that I'm going after this, but I think it warrants a conversation at the very least.

John Edwards' decision to continue running for President, despite his wife's being re-diagnosed with cancer, disturbs me.

I cannot support any person that makes a public exhibition out of a loved one's illnesses for political gain. Yesterday's staged event was meant to do that. The day before getting ready to take off on a fundraising tour that would include a stop here in Massachusetts, John Edwards wants everyone to know his wife's cancer has reoccurred. There was John, Standing about five feet away from her, not holding her hand, not consoling her, leaving her off to the side like a beaten puppy dog, he addressed the nation as if he were President already, chalking up sympathy for his utterly listless campaign.

This just goes to show how different politicians are than us. John Edwards 'needed' to tell the world about his wife's cancer. She 'needed' to 'come clean' to the public and show that she was going to conquer all. Deval Patrick held a press conference to tell us his wife was combating depression. Senator Chuck Hagel decided to stage a press conference to let us know that he hadn't made a decision yet on whether or not to run for President. The vanity of today's modern politician is unbelievable and frankly, inexcusable.

Not running in today's political culture is akin to death. These people have no shame and will continue running, even when it isn't time to run. Running sustains their unending vanity. At least John Edwards, unlike our own John Kerry was at least good at something, and that was raking hospitals over the coals. I find it to be the cruelest of ironies that Edwards is now going to have to depend on the same doctors and hospitals he's swindled millions from over the years, to save the life of his wife.

I wish the best of luck to his wife and my prayers are with her. However, I couldn't imagine running for any office being more important than tending to the health of my own wife. Birch Bayh, father of Senator Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) ran for President in 1971. When he discovered his wife had breast cancer, he dropped out. I would urge John Edwards to do the right thing, and drop out of the race himself.

Why Don't Afro-Americans Vote Republican?

Last night at the Calvin Coolidge banquet I had the chance to hear Holyoke Police Chief Anthony Scott speak after receiving the public service award for being the best Republican public official and all around stud. I was almost ashamed to have never heard the man speak in the past and feel like we could all learn something from him.

During his award 'acceptance' speech, he said 'You think It's hard being a Republican in Massachusetts; you should try being a Republican and black in Massachusetts". I know it's not easy. One of my very best friends in college, a guy I very much admire and look up to is also an African American and Republican. He used to joke he was a 'walking contradiction'. He was black, Republican, and possibly the biggest hippie I had ever met in my life. Nothing about him made sense, but he was one of the few people I ever met whom I could seriously deem 'unique'.

I remember my friend being called a 'shoe shining, Uncle Tom N**ger' for being a Republican. I remember his listening to the phone messages people would leave at his house. Shockingly, these messages weren't left by white people. They were left by black people. They despised him because he was different. They despised him because he believed in self-accountability and was courageously outspoken on his feelings regarding affirmative action and other controversial issues.

I'm sure Chief Scott's dealt with this kind of stuff plenty of times himself. We all dealt with it a little, as someone decided to phone in a bomb threat to try and deter us from enjoying our function. "No one has done more for black people than conservatives" the Chief said almost with a tear in the eye. Chiefs don't cry though, but it made me seriously pause for a second and realize how thankful I am for good, honest people. It's folks like Chief Scott that restore faith in humanity. It was certainly a pleasure to hear him speak.

I walked away from the event thinking on the drive home about my friend and about people like Chief Scott. Why don't African Americans flock to folks like that in droves? Why do African Americans vote Democrat when it seems their core values couldn't be further from the Democratic Party's idealogical core?

I hate the concept of hyphenated Americans, and maybe I’ll do an article on that subject one of these days, but for the nonce I will accept the politically correct term in order to focus on more pressing issues. I cannot understand why the African-American community seems incapable of recognizing that the party they perpetually prop up is working at cross purposes to their own interests. Furthermore, given the nearly even split between the parties, it is unquestionable that African-American voters have the power to swing elections to the Republican side should they decide to do so. Let’s examine a few positions taken by the Democratic party that are in direct opposition to the best interests of the African-American community.

Gun Control:

The Democratic Party is the party of gun control. These feel-good policies might sound good, but the actual effect is to disarm law abiding citizens, or turn them into unwitting criminals, while doing absolutely nothing to stop gun violence and crime. Given the disproportionately high crime rates in the urban neighborhoods in which many African Americans live, the need to maintain the ability to defend oneself is self-evident. The police aren’t going to be there until long after the crime has been committed. Since the state has no affirmative duty to come to the defense of the citizenry, disarming average citizens seems to be an all cost and no benefit position. The inability to defend oneself, particularly in high crime neighborhoods, has been actively supported by the Democratic Party. This is contrary to the best interests of the African-American community.

School Choice:

The Democratic Party is beholden to the powerful National Education Association, the lobbying arm of the teacher’s unions. Any effort to reform the education system will have to come from somewhere other than the Democrats. Unfortunately, school choice (i.e. vouchers) is vehemently opposed by the Democratic Party. In fact, any serious effort at real education reform will be opposed. If a good education is the foundation for moving up and out of poverty, the Democrats haven’t delivered it in over two generations. This is hardly beneficial to the African-American community which has a disproportionate share of underperforming schools. The Democratic position is again contrary to the best interests of the African-American community.

Gay Marriage:

As one of the most deeply religious and church centered groups in the nation, the African-American community doesn’t support same-sex marriage. The uproar that occurs when the gay community tries to compare itself to the civil rights struggles of African-Americans and co-opt the moral high ground earned by them supports this conclusion. These two Democratic constituencies have very little common ground beyond the way they vote. Given the inordinately high illegitimacy rate in the African-American community, undermining the institution of marriage certainly isn’t in their interests. Getting back to a more traditional family model would be an enormous benefit to the African-American community, but not if it’s compromised in the way the Democrats seem determined to do.

Social Security Reform:

Given the shorter life expectancy in the African-American community, social security is a total rip-off for them. Nearly every dollar earned by African-Americans is subject to the FICA tax, and the wealth accumulated during a longer than average working life is forfeited when the earner dies. Having ownership of these savings would allow families to pass on this accumulated wealth to their children, supplying the seed money from which empires are built. Through their fear mongering, the Democrats have managed to gain support for the confiscation of this wealth from the very people from whom it is being expropriated. This is hardly in the interests of the African-American community.

Affirmative Action:

In what can only be the longest running inside joke in the history of mankind, the elites have peddled this monstrosity to the African-American community. On its face it seems like a good idea and a boon to the recipients of this largess. But it is really nothing more than a condescending willingness to concede that African-Americans cannot succeed without the help of their white superiors. It makes a mockery of the concept of equality and runs counter to the ideas of Frederick Douglas and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Every African-American success is tainted by this program, and the elites get to take credit for being so enlightened. Undermining the concept of merit and installing a sense of entitlement in its place isn’t in the true interests of the African-American community. The staunchest defenders of affirmative action, and its close cousin, diversity, are the Democrats.

Welfare Reform:

The hyperbolic predictions emanating from the Democratic Party on welfare reform never came to pass. The planets didn’t stop orbiting the sun. In fact, once its success was apparent, the first “Black President” jumped to the front of the parade and claimed credit for the success. This reform was only signed in the eleventh hour by a president whose concern for reelection overwhelmed the virulent protests of his party. That welfare reform disproportionately benefited the African-American community is indisputable; as is the Democrat’s opposition to the reform in the first place. Once again, the Democrats were working against the true best interests of the African-American community.

How can the African-American community continue to support the Democratic Party? It just doesn’t make sense to me. The “War on Poverty” hasn’t delivered on the promise in over forty years. We’ve spent enough money to give every poor person at its inception a nice three bedroom home and a college education to every child in those homes, and where are we at? Affirmative action gets candidates into colleges and jobs that are beyond their abilities, and the subsequent inevitable failures that follow are simply ignored. It’s insanity to keep doing the same things over and over again while expecting a different result every time. Isn’t it time for a change? With folks like Chief Scott laying the groundwork, perhaps one day we'll see it.

Byron Rushing: Rolling out the "Welcome" Mat

State Rep. Byron Rushing is insane. I don't think anyone, even some Democrats would debate that. For years now, Rushing has decided to file a piece of legislation that pretty much says we should just forget all that immigration law stuff and 'welcome' anyone into the state who wants to come here.

Well, it's back. And thankfully, it's got about as much of a chance of passing through the legislature as a bill that would put my naked likeness on the top of the golden dome of the state house does.

Democrats were mum on the proposal, which Rushing, one of the Legislature’s more liberal Democrats, has filed annually since 1990. Sen. Therese Murray, (D-Plymouth), who is expected to become Senate president, couldn’t be reached. Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick declined to comment.
Rushing said if his proposal was in place two weeks ago when more than 300 workers at Michael Bianco Inc. were arrested, events might have unfolded differently.
“Our first reaction would have been to help these people, and there would have been no pause,” he said.

Well, "Mum" might be a pretty nice way to put things, but this is Massachusetts and these days, I'll take what I can get.

Byron, Byron... oh Byron.

Trav Resigns, Murray New Senate President

Trav's done in the Senate. Now he's going to go into the influence peddling business, oddly enough with Atty. Tom Kiley, who was counsel for another Senate President you may have heard of, named Billy Bulger. But nope, it doesn't stink. Not even the fact that he's auctioning his services off on ebay.

Our new Senate President, Therese Murray, has an impressive past, even by Beacon Hill Standards. Here's some highlights:

--Was a "mitigation manager" for Stanley Dukakis for $1,022 a week

--Made sure the family is taken care of on the state payroll: Nephew Michael Whalen works for Treasurer Tim Cahill for $32,000 a year. Then there's her daughter Lauren. Can't forget about her! She was hired as a human resources coordinator by Attorney General Tom Riley at $46,000 a year. According to some she left on Jan. 10th because of course, your budget doesn't get cut when Mommy's the President of the Senate.

-- Today in the Boston Herald, Senator Steve Panagiotakos (D-Lowell), who's taking over Murray's post of the head of the powerful Ways and Means Committee said: “She will stand up to anyone. But Terry’s not confrontational for the sake of being confrontational. She’s someone who wants to get things done. She knows as much as anyone about the inner workings of state government.” She sure isn't (she gets others to do it for her) and sure does. Take a look at this.

Let the fun begin.

Thankfully, the Mass GOP tried to at least hold off the vote for a little while over questions surrounding misuse of taxpayer fund at Tourism Massachusetts. Regardless, that didn't hold much up and Murray was elected President today, 34-5, right down party lines.

Senate President to Resign

It's expected that Senate President Robert Travaglini (D-Boston) will resign tomorrow.

No, he's not taking the Health Care CEO job-thingy. Nope, he's doing what every good Democrat does; starting his own lobbying firm. Nope, no 'cooling off period' here. He's just going to jump right in, head first and start getting goodies while the goodies getting is good!

Marge Eagan: Deval Patrick Showing True "Grit"

Is it utterly impossible for Democrats to look at their own and raise an eyebrow?

In the latest 'How Dare You' piece by a member of the liberal Boston media, Margery Eagan is quick to point out all the mean-face, Republican evil-doers who also apparently hot-dogged on the job in an attempt to justify Governor Deval's recent issues. This one though, took the taco:

Perhaps you have heard about Mitt and Ann Romney’s “my family is better than your family” presidential tour, where they go on about their perfect marriage, family, teeth, hair and home? It’s nauseating, really.

I’ll take grit over Mitt and Ann in Wonderland. Any day.

'Grit'? Sure. Nothing screams 'grit' like $72,000 a year salaries for Secretaries of non-public officials, flashy curtains, Cadillacs, or calls on fancy cell phones regarding favors for former employers. When I think of those things, I think of ripped blue jeans, beards and flannel shirts.

And yes, Large Marge, some people have families that aren't completely screwed up. Are you jealous or something?

Hillary: Talk Radio is 'unfair'.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, in distress at not recieving much of a favorable nod from talk radio, recently revived the specter of the Fairness Doctrine. This concept was introduced and rapidly killed in the last century. She was joined in this clamor by fellow liberals, to no one's surprise.

The essence of the Fairness Doctrine is equality in presenting points of view. The idea is that if one political candidate is criticized on a media outlet such as television or radio, he or she must be given equal time to rebut with a personal defense.

The problem with the doctrine, which was quickly discovered when the original act was implemented, is that the United States of America is not a socialist nation. That is, the airwaves are "public" in the sense that no one owns them per se, but they are very private in that one must pay money--big money--to secure the exclusive right to broadcast on a particular bandwidth. Neither you nor I could broadcast an alternate program on one of the major networks because they have a license to transmit solely their choice of programming.

Thus, to demand of Rush Limbaugh's network that Al Franken be allowed equal time to do his unfunny rant-and-rave routine, which failed miserably on Air America despite being subsidized to the tune of millions of dollars in donor contributions, one would cite the Fairness Doctrine as the casus belli. (Note that that particular Latin term is deliciously appropriate: it means the rationale for going to war.)

But the Doctrine quickly ran into the problem of ownership. Having nothing of substance to say, liberals are rather boring. Once one sees past their accusations and spins, a process which requires up to five minutes for the dull-witted of us, they are worthless in terms of entertainment or interest value. Radio and TV stations make their money from renting air time to advertisers, who pay the high fees to pitch their products and services in anticipation that there is someone out there listening. If your main content is a drag, your ratings go in the tank and advertisers go where the eyes and ears are. Hence the merciful death of Air America after years of useless drivel. It was a total, utter, and dreadfully embarrassing failure for liberals because they have nothing whatsoever to say that anyone other than a moveon.org mouth-foamer would want to hear.

But Hillary says that's not fair. After all, she alleges, talk radio is almost entirely conservative. Therefore, raido listeners are presented with a daily barrage of conservative points of view and there is no surviving liberal counterpart.

This is somewhat mysterious. After all, Hillary is reasonably bright. She managed to survive the Bill years with a reputation that enabled her to buy a New York senate seat. Does she not understand that no one wants to hear liberals on the radio because there is nothing to hear? That listeners tune in to talk radio--voluntarily, with no one holding a shotgun to their head--because conservative points of view are preceived to be factual, sensible, and reasonable? That they are actually interesting?

Perhaps Hillary isn't so bright after all. She seems to think America is rather stupid not to see through her nonsense. But then, liberals are by definition afflicted by the mental disorder of trying to live in the world of their imaginations and earnest emotional desires rather than reality. More likely than not, she is sincere and just living up to her job description.

The "Let's Lose Now Caucus"

I love the National Review. A great read from them on House Democrats.

Obama's Audacity (Or Lack Thereof)

Philosopher Hanna Arendt always like to say that “politics is not the nursery”, but if one was to take a quick look at today’s political climate, one will see this proved untrue if not undeniably false. Triangulatio, which is the practice of playing opposing forces against one another lest by any chance one’s own principles be considered “offensive”, is now widely practiced in political campaigns.

Politicians like Barak Obama and our own Deval Patrick. who subscribe to this rhetoric, insist that arguments between opposing points of view creates more problems than solutions. It polarizes anyone who dares stand anywhere that isn’t the middle. This goes against the very point of politics and the process that surrounds it. Politics and government exist to help humanity better solve disputes amongst ourselves. Denying the necessary fact that politics deals solely in disagreements as opposed to agreements tends to produce a chilling effect against folks who don’t stand squarely in the center. If you take a stance, you’re deemed ‘controversial’ or ‘extreme’.

The simple fact is that in times of conflict, the center cannot hold, and if the best of the best lack conviction, it gives way. To borrow (or continue to ) from William Butler Yeats- to the worst, which are full of passionate intensity.

So now we’ve got Barack Obama, whose autobiography, “The Audacity of Hope” has become a neo-manifesto for ‘progressives’. My Father-In-Law leant me the book to read, and as I didn’t pay for it, I felt it wouldn’t hurt to give it a read. As far as I could tell from my own reading, Obama shows a tendency, even an outright eagerness, to take positions not conspicuous, let’s say, for their audacity. Perhaps his most prominent position in this regard is his ‘stand’ against genocide in Darfur, which really isn’t a ‘stand’ against or for anything, seeing as there is no such thing as a pro-genocide movement to ‘stand’ against.

In fact, Obama seems to be full of this sort of blather. When Obama declared he was running for the Presidency in Springfield, IL., he roused up the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858, in which, as he told it, Lincoln “called on a divided house to stand together.”

It would have been awesome is Lincoln had, well, actually ever said that. What Lincoln did argue, actually and implicitly, was that the house would ‘cease to be divided,’ which is not quite the same. All the previous compromises made by moderate governments had amplified the danger of complacency. When Lincoln judged that a reckoning of some kind was coming no matter what, it was an attack on the establishment, moderate government, which, far from being too adversarial, had been complacent about those who wanted to split the country for far too long.

Harry Jaffa, a leading, if not THE leading historian on the subject, claimed that Lincoln represented a ‘great link in the chain of events that led to secession and civil war.’ So rather than Obama’s preference for a common front, its more in line with common sense to accept, as Lincoln did, that politics is division by definition.

This 100%, testosterone-free ‘rising star’ of the Democratic party is aiming, like Deval Patrick did here in Massachusetts, to turn the political arena into a nursery. Like Governor Patrick, Obama’s supporters would likely struggle to name his greatest accomplishment, aside of course, from his impeccable dental hygene and making the initials “B.O.” not be so gross anymore. One hopes this juvenile attempt will miss it’s mark, if only because it has little to offer it in a time when, with actual enemies presenting themselves against western civilization as a whole, politics in the western world’s leading country should be serious business. Obama’s triangulation politics, in contrast, are meant for show, and they ought to be regarded and treated as such.

After all, as Ann Coulter said in a column; “If Obama's biggest asset is his inexperience, then if by the slightest chance he were elected and were to run for a second term, he will have to claim he didn't learn anything the first four years.”