Reformed Hippie

Well he made his choice… he selected a person with a fatal foot-in-mouth disease… Senator Joe Biden:

Barack Obama named Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware as his vice presidential running mate early Saturday, balancing his ticket with a seasoned congressional veteran well-versed in foreign policy and defense issues.

Obama announced the pick on his Web site with a photo of the two men and an appeal for donations. A text message went out shortly afterward that said, “Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee.”

The National Review Online has an interesting composite of Biden’s symptoms of the foot and mouth disease.  So this should be very interesting and entertaining to watch in the upcoming weeks.

But what is more interesting is that in June Obama made the statement that Hillary “would be on anyone’s short list”. Yet we find out (and Obama campaign workers has confirmed this) that she was not even on his short list because she had not been vetted!

“She was never vetted,” a Democratic official reported. “She was not asked for a single piece of paper. She and Senator Obama have never had a single conversation about it. How would he know if she’d take it?”  The official also said Clinton never met with Obama’s vetting team of Eric Holder and Caroline Kennedy.  And the official said she was never asked for medical records or for any financial 2008 information about her or former President Bill Clinton. The last information the couple has disclosed about taxes and financial holdings was for 2007.

Way to go O!  You have just snubbed your nose at a lot of voters…

A dark horse contender, Sen. Hillary Clinton, re-entered the conversation this week following a poll indicating that nearly half of her supporters have yet to embrace Obama.

Maybe the Bill-and-Hill show next week at the convention is a attempt to patch up things between Hill and O!  We shall see.  But will Hillary’s supporters be impressed with their one-big-lovey-dovey-happy-family show?  I doubt that Hill’s supporters are going to run and have a group hug with Obama’s supporters on the floor of the convention.

Bookmark It

It has been claimed by some that McCain ‘cheated’ at the televised forum this past Saturday at the Saddleback Church in Forest Park, California.  NBC’s Andrea Mitchell claims that McCain cheated by not being entirely in the ‘cone of silence” and overheard some of the questions posed to Obama.  According to Mitchel, that help prepare him for his upcoming hour after Obama’s turn was over…

“The Obama people must feel that he didn’t do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because what they are putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama,” Mitchell said. “He seemed so well-prepared.”

Let’s face it… McCain was on the top of his game Saturday… Obama looked like a relief pitcher struggling to find the strike zone.  Obama’s people would rather throw out bits of the sore loser feeling rather than taking it like a real politician.  Obama hesitated, paused, hemmed and hawed and just looked like he had a hard time coming up with concise answers.  McCain was clearly the opposite.  Better luck next time Obama.

As for me there will not be a next time.  That one forum at Saddleback was all that I needed.  And just what I needed.  There are supposed to be a couple of debates after the convention but, unless I just feel like being entertained that night instead of informed, I will be watching and/or doing something else.  The normal debate format is too much about spin and not enough about the facts.  Too many memorized excerpts from canned speeches.  You cannot prepare for extemporaneous questions… the answers have to come from your core beliefs.  You must have thought these out in your mind many times.  And to be honest… I think some of these candidates do not like answering questions like “What is your greatest moral failing?”  You have not heard that question asked by the MSM on debate night.

Questions like that force a candidate to face up to things he would rather avoid given the chance.  So you say “What difference does it make what moral failing a person has???” “What does that have to do with being President???”.  Not much I suppose in a direct manner of speaking.  But it gives us a glimpse into the candidate’s soul.  Is his answer from the heart?  Is the answer honest?  How would his/her evaluation of the question reflect on their core beliefs and thought processes?  Questions like “What was the most agonizing decision you ever made?” helps us to dog deeper than superficial policy questions.

If we wind up knowing the answers to these tough and personal questions, then we can have an idea on how they would think on various policy decisions.  All-in-all this format should be used in future Presidential elections.  I hope it will be.

Bookmark It

Following up on the case of Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean (see previous posts "Report: Did DHS Lie in Border Agents trial", "“Comprehensive immigration bill…” Let’s start with Compean and Ramon", "Border control agents running scarred… from our own Feds", "Bush lets Americans down… again", and most recently "Osvaldo Aldrete Davila finally pleads guilty"), on Friday, August 1st, both Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean lost their appeal in the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on the most serious of the charges of assault, discharge of a weapon in the commission of a crime of violence, tampering with an official proceeding, and deprivation of civil rights. However the charges of obstruction of justice were overturned.

In their opinion ( to Jurist Legal News and Research):

For the most part, the trial of this case was about credibility, and although the jury could have gone either way, it chose not to believe the defendants’ version of the crucial events of February 17. The trial of the case was conducted fairly and without reversible error. The exclusion of evidence relating to the size of the marijuana load and Aldrete-Davila’s alleged involvement in drug-trafficking events of October 2005 did not violate the defendants’ Sixth Amendment rights to present a complete defense nor did it deny them a proper cross-examination of a witness against them. They were denied no right of due process for lack of notice that § 924(c) could be applied to police officers while performing law enforcement duties. Nor was the § 924(c) indictment defective. Moreover, the defendants were properly convicted of substantive crimes, not for violating Border Patrol policies. In instructing the jury, no reversible errors were committed and, finally, the evidence fully supports the jury verdict. We therefore affirm the convictions for counts 1 through 5 and counts 11 and 12.

Yet another travesty of justice. I am not a legal beagle by any means, but it is incredibly obvious that any future/prior acts that demonstrate a criminal nature should be allowed in court.  Let the jury figure out what it means.  The appeals court takes notice of Aldrette-Davilla’s subsequent illegal activities in their decision:

… evidence of other drug activities, in the context of the credibility question before it, might prove to be
of some relevance, but because the evidence was so prejudicial to the trial of the case and so potentially confusing to the jury, its relevance was substantially outweighed by its prejudice and it could not be admitted.

This is the falacy of our justice system.  Judges are allowed to determine what evidence the jury is allowed to see.  In this case the judge felt that the jury was either too stupid or perhaps ignorant to distinguish between the acts committed by Aldrette-Davilla on February 17th (which is the date the agents shot Aldrette-Davilla) and October 2005.  The appeals court even acknowledged that the events of October 2005  “might prove to be of some relevance“.  Yet it was withheld from the jury.  Oh, by the way, Aldrette-Davilla was later charged for those events of October 2005.  Mighty convenient.  In my opinion US Attorney Johnny Sutton allowed Aldrette-Davilla to remain uncharged on the October 2005 crimes until after the Ramos-Compean trial which began in 2006.  Had he been charged the jury would have known about his subsequent actions and perhaps counted Aldrette-Davilla as a criminal and liar.

And let us not forget that Aldrette-Davilla is a criminal in the United States illegally.

Instead Aldrette-Davilla was allowed to assert Fifth Amendment rights out of the presence of the jury and therefore the jury never knew about the incident.

Several U.S. officials have voiced their displeasure and outrage at this miscarridge of justice. US Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) release this statement:

The drug dealer was continuing to run drugs into the U.S. while serving as the government’s star witness.  The fact that the drug dealer’s criminal activity persisted even as he took the stand against these agents is reason enough to vacate these two convictions… I intend to appeal to the President once again and personally request that he review the facts of this case and immediately pardon Agents Ramos and Compean.

Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Diane Feinstein (D-CA) have similar reactions:

While I am still reviewing this opinion, it’s clear that Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean will not receive the relief that they deserve. It’s been more than one year now since Senator Feinstein and I first called on the President to address this miscarriage of justice. With this court decision, it is now more important than ever for the President to act.

As I have long said, it is incomprehensible to me that an illegal alien drug smuggler was allowed to violate his immunity agreement, perjure himself and be granted a series of unlimited visas to roam free in our country while two border patrol agents were given excessive prison sentences. The sentences of 11 years for Agent Ramos and 12 years for Agent Compean were significantly higher than for many other serious crimes.

This administration has now had ample time to carefully gather and review the facts of this case. The facts, in my view, point to a clear case of prosecutorial overreach and a case where the sentence does not match the crime. This case cries out for a commutation that is fair and just, and I once again call on President Bush to act.

It appears that the only hope of these two Border Patrol agents lies within the Supreme Court.  But don’t count on support there.  And don’t wait on Bush to pardon them…  he has more serious things to think about.  Like Scooter Libbey’s future…

Bookmark It

This has been troubling me ever since the piece on Nightline last Friday night…

WOODRUFF: Why did you continue to deny it [publicly] and not tell the truth?

EDWARDS: Because I did not want the public to know what I had done. Fair and simple. And there’s also a lot of these you know supermarket tabloid allegations are just lies, they’re complete lies. But this, this mistake, is the truth.

Everyone knows that rags like the National Enquirer are gossip and rumor merchants.  They thrive on this stuff.  And a lot of American’s swallow it hook, line and sinker.  It is tabloid journalism.  But every once in a while they get something right.  They got this one right. But it seems like the Edwards’ are attempting to discount the truth by throwing in subliminal suggestions that this is just tabloid journalism… inconsequential… does not really mean much considering the National Enquirer published it… even Elizabeth Edwards does the same thing:

Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies in a tabloid publication, because of a picture falsely suggesting that John was spending time with a child it wrongly alleged he had fathered outside our marriage, our private matter could no longer be wholly private.

The fact remains that on this one point the National Enquirer was correct… John Edwards did have an affair.  What is wrong with reporting the facts and holding the players accountable?  Of course John did not want to get caught.  Nobody does.  But when you are caught up with don’t try and discount the truth by alluding to the veracity of the source.

What about the rest of the story?  Who is the baby’s father?  Where did the “hush” money come from?  All sorts of questions will abound and some may never be answered since, thus far, the Edwards’ and Hunter are remaining mum.  And can you blame Rielle?  If I was being paid $15K per month I would not rock the boat either.

But if the Feds will ever investigate where the money came from… follow the paper trail… Edwards may find himself temporarily relocating to different housing.

Bookmark It

Pelosi is now backing off somewhat on her no-drilling stand.  But are you really surprised here??? Nope.  Her entire purpose was to help Obama save face by not forcing him to vote on the issue… if it never comes up for a vote then he cannot be open to ridicule.  Please note for the record that until very recently Obama was against drilling:

“If offshore drilling would provide short-term relief at the pump or a long-term strategy for energy independence, it would be worthy of our consideration, regardless of the risks. But most experts, even within the Bush Administration, concede it would do neither. It would merely prolong the failed energy policies we have seen from Washington for thirty years.”

Then in an interview with the Palm Beach post August 10th he reversed himself…

“My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices… If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage - I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done”

That reversal was Pelosi’s que to allow her to begin backing off…  this Michelle Malkin posts here and the TheHill article here suggest she is now doing just that….

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday night dropped her staunch opposition to a vote on offshore oil drilling in the House.

Republicans, reacting to high gas prices, have demanded a vote on additional oil exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf, where drilling is currently blocked by a moratorium. Until now, Pelosi (D-Calif.) has resisted the idea as a “hoax.” But in an interview on CNN’s Larry King Live, she indicated that she was open to a vote.

“They have this thing that says drill offshore in the protected areas,” Pelosi said. “We can do that. We can have a vote on that.”

She indicated such a vote would have to be part of a larger package that included other policies, like releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which she said could bring down prices in a matter of days.

“But it has to be part of something that says we want to bring immediate relief to the public and is not just a hoax on them,” Pelosi continued.

She even indicated that she might support a package that includes drilling. She said her decision on whether to support such legislation would depend on how the policies are packaged.

“It’s not excluded, let’s put it that way,” Pelosi said.

So what’s next???  Pelosi-Reid will now begin deciding how they want this played out.  After all the entire Congress is controlled by these two individuals ("Taxation without representation").  The political game has to be played according to their rules no matter what is at stake for average Americans.

There will be a “compromise” bill that will probably dictate to the oil companies on how to go about doing this.  But of course none of this will happen until after their August vacation.  Five weeks paid vacation.  That “We the People” are paying for.

I can’t even afford to go somewhere for a weekender.

Bookmark It

Is she really dead in the water for the nomination?  Apparently not yet.  There may be life yet in them there bones.  This recent flap over Edwards has once again got Hillary’s Operation-Resurrection busily plotting away.  I previously stated my opinions about her “hell bent” attitude towards the Presidency (see “The Clinton Dynasty“ ).

Now, according to some (”Wolfson: Edwards’ Cover-up Cost Clinton the Nomination” and “More rumblings of a Hillary coup (updated)“) she make an attempt.

“I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee,” former Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson told ABCNews.com.

Obama won 37.6 per cent of the vote. Edwards won 29.7 per cent and Clinton won 29.5 per cent, according to results posted by the Iowa Democratic Party.

“Our voters and Edwards’ voters were the same people,” Wolfson said the Clinton polls showed. “They were older, pro-union. Not all, but maybe two-thirds of them would have been for us and we would have barely beaten Obama.”

Two months earlier, Edwards had vociferously, but falsely, denied a story in the National Enquirer about the alleged affair last October, and few in the mainstream media even reported the denial.

Of course Wolfson’s interpretation of what would have happened had not Edwards been in the mix is sheer speculation.  Although I believe that Hillary has Wolfson fronting the idea to test the political waters.

If she could actually pull this stunt off and steal the nomination away from Obama… or perhaps force her way into a VP slot with her “had-it-not-been” hypothetical scenarios, it would flip the DNC on its head for years to come.  No longer will it be able to say Bush stole the election in 2000 and 2004, but now could add Hill’s name to the list of swindlers.

I very seriously doubt the party will let her get away with it.  But again, she is determined to be President at any cost.  The whooing of the super delegates will commence shortly.

The plot thickens.

Bookmark It

Good for Tyson… due to the overwhelming outrage of American citizens, Tyson has decided to reverse itself on giving a paid holiday for Muslims… the press announcement:

Labor Day Reinstated as Paid Holiday at Shelbyville, TN, Plant; Tyson Foods Requested Change from Union

Springdale, Arkansas – August 8, 2008 - Tyson Foods, Inc. announced today it has reached a new agreement with the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU), an American union, reinstating Labor Day as one of the designated paid holidays under the contract for covered employees in the Shelbyville, Tennessee, plant.

Tyson made this request on behalf of its Shelbyville plant employees, some of whom had expressed concern about the new contract provisions relative to paid holidays. In an effort to be responsive, Tyson asked the union to reopen the contract to address the holiday issue, and the union agreed to do so. The union membership voted overwhelmingly Thursday to reinstate Labor Day as one of the plant’s paid holidays, while keeping Eid al-Fitr as an additional paid holiday for this year only. This means that in 2008 only, Shelbyville employees will have nine paid holidays.

For the remainder of the five-year contract period, the eight paid holidays will include: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and a Personal Holiday, which could either be the employee’s birthday, Eid al-Fitr or another day requested and approved by their supervisor.

This issue concerns only the plant at Shelbyville, Tennessee. Labor Day has always been celebrated, and continues to be, at the other 118 Tyson plants across the country.

The Shelbyville complex employs approximately 1,200 people. Approximately 1,000 workers are covered by the RWDSU union agreement at that location.

Bookmark It

Reille Hunter

John Edwards getting ready for...

UPDATE: Edwards Release Statement

STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS

August 8, 2008

Chapel Hill, North Carolina

In 2006, I made a serious error in judgment and conducted myself in a way that was disloyal to my family and to my core beliefs. I recognized my mistake and I told my wife that I had a liaison with another woman, and I asked for her forgiveness. Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public. When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99% honest is no longer enough.

I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then. I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established. I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby. I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby.

It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up – feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.

I have given a complete interview on this matter and having done so, will have nothing more to say.

Well if he lied about not having the affair then maybe he is lying about the child being his.  We will see if Edwards actually takes the paternity test.

A day after the DNC chair in North Carolina announced that if Edwards did not give a reasonable and believable explanation of the rumors flying around about his relationship with Rielle Hunter that he would not be allowed to speak at the DNC in Denver, Edwards admits to the affair with his former videographer, Rielle Hunter. However he denies being the father of her child. The confession is supposed to be broadcast on Friday night’s edition of ABC Nightline.

That should raise their Nielsen ratings.

Bookmark It

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

Well I am not sure if I would call her hot… cute maybe. And definitely a spoiled brat. But at least she understands that everyone (that means Obama and McCain) must work together to solve the energy crisis. Why can’t Congress be as smart as Paris?

Bookmark It

This is simply the most sanctimonious and outrageous act in recent memory.  Over 70% of the American people believe in opening up additional areas in the United States for oil exploration.  Yet one pompous airhead in the House of NonRepresentatives is allowed to single handedly disallow a vote on a problem that an overwhelming number of American people are interested in solving.

Instead she has set up herself as judge and jury on this matter.  Read her pathetic attempt on ABC this weekend at diverting a simple question on the subject:

PELOSI: “…This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.”

STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?

PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?

PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject.

One thing that Pelosi has mastered in Washington… double talk.

This country needs to begin another revolution.  “Taxation without representation”… that was the cry many, many years ago.  Yet we see the same problem today.  Nancy Pelosi IS NOT the only representative for this country…. she has no right to keep the remainder of the 450+ representatives from voting.  Why do they allow this witch (and perhaps others would substitute the ‘w’ for a ‘b’) to rule the barnyard in Washington.  Instead of being a hen she sets herself up as the rooster who rules the barnyard.

It is high time that “We the people…” begin to take back our country from the likes of people such as Pelosi.  We truly need a revolution in this country… we need to vote out of office every last representative who allowed her to rule the barnyard.

It is too bad that the majority of the men in the House of NonRepresentation has the balls to take her on.

Bookmark It