For starters, we’ll be talking with Congressman David Davis about gas prices!!

Congressman Davis is sponsoring the No More Excuses Act and we’ll go over that with him.

And yep, today there’s plenty of talk about bears: Russian Bears and the Teddy Bear.  We’ll be talking to Dr. Paul Kengor, terrific author and Professor at Grove City College, about Teddy Kennedy and the KGB.  

Here’s a brief from Dr. Kengor’s interview at Front Page Mag:

FP: We’re here today to revisit Ted Kennedy’s reaching out to the KGB during the Reagan period. Refresh our readers’ memories a bit.

Kengor: The episode is based on a document produced 25 years ago this week. I discussed it with you in our earlier interview back in November 2006. In my book, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism, I presented a rather eye-opening May 14, 1983 KGB document on Ted Kennedy. The entire document, unedited, unabridged, is printed in the book, as well as all the documentation affirming its authenticity. Even with that, today, almost 25 years later, it seems to have largely remained a secret.

FP: Tell us about this document.

Kengor: It was a May 14, 1983 letter from the head of the KGB, Viktor Chebrikov, to the head of the USSR, the odious Yuri Andropov, with the highest level of classification. Chebrikov relayed to Andropov an offer from Senator Ted Kennedy, presented by Kennedy’s old friend and law-school buddy, John Tunney, a former Democratic senator from California, to reach out to the Soviet leadership at the height of a very hot time in the Cold War. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was deeply troubled by the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, which he believed was bringing us perilously close to nuclear confrontation. Kennedy, according to Chebrikov, blamed this situation not on the Soviet leadership but on the American president—Ronald Reagan. Not only was the USSR not to blame, but, said Chebrikov, Kennedy was, quite the contrary, “very impressed” with Andropov.

The thrust of the letter is that Reagan had to be stopped, meaning his alleged aggressive defense policies, which then ranged from the Pershing IIs to the MX to SDI, and even his re-election bid, needed to be stopped. It was Ronald Reagan who was the hindrance to peace. That view of Reagan is consistent with things that Kennedy said and wrote at the time, including articles in sources like Rolling Stone (March 1984) and in a speeches like his March 24, 1983 remarks on the Senate floor the day after Reagan’s SDI speech, which he lambasted as “misleading Red-Scare tactics and reckless Star Wars schemes.”

Even more interesting than Kennedy’s diagnosis was the prescription: According to Chebrikov, Kennedy suggested a number of PR moves to help the Soviets in terms of their public image with the American public. He reportedly believed that the Soviet problem was a communication problem, resulting from an inability to counter Reagan’s (not the USSR’s) “propaganda.” If only Americans could get through Reagan’s smokescreen and hear the Soviets’ peaceful intentions.

Today on the radio we’ll interview David Hagberg and Boris Gindin.  Mr. Hagberg has spent three decades studying the Soviet Union–their government, military, secret intelligence services, and more.  We’ll talk to him about Mutiny, a new book that tells the story of Boris Gindin.  Boris was a former Senior Leiutenant aboard the mutinied Storozhevoy.  

Boris has kept quiet for 30 years, but is now telling his story with the help of author David Hagberg.  Boris will be joining us as well.  We’ll talk to them about the book, the inside story of the true events that inspired the Hunt for Red October.

We’ll also talk about what’s going right now in the Soviet Union, especially with regard to Putin and the future of the Soviet military.

Be sure to tune in!  They both will be joining us at 4:30 pm Eastern.

Oh, the editorial department of Investors Business Daily has caught Senator Obama in a little double-speak.

Obama now says he doesn’t favor the idea of a gas tax holiday, but read on:

Obama took a different view on the issue when he was an Illinois legislator, voting at least three times in favor of temporarily lifting the state’s 5% sales tax on gasoline. The tax holiday was finally approved during a special session in June 2000, when Illinois motorists were furious that gas prices had just topped $2 a gallon in Chicago. Seems he was for a gas-tax moratorium before he was against it.

And it is beginning to appear that Obama is having some difficulty with numbers:

In an ad that aired before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, candidate Obama said: “I’m here to tell you the truth. We could suspend the gas tax for six months, but that’s not going to bring down gas prices long-term. You’re gonna save about 25, 30 dollars, or half a tank of gas.”

Speaking in Indianapolis before the ad was aired, Obama threw different numbers to a swooning crowd. “I know it polls well,” he said, “but here’s the truth: It would save the average family 30 bucks over the course of three months — $28, or more precisely, 30 cents a day — which is less than (a) cup of coffee at the 7-Eleven.”

If that’s his idea of math, we don’t want him in charge of the federal budget or U.S. energy policy. So which is it — $30 over three months or over six? And he must think we don’t drive very much.

The federal gas tax is 18.4 cents a gallon, so accepting his 30 cents a day figure, he must think we use a little more than a gallon and a half a day, including weekends, driving to our jobs, to the mall, to our kid’s soccer games, even to the 7-Eleven.

If he’s talking $30 over six months or 180 days, he’s talking about 16 or 17 cents a day, which means he thinks the average American family uses less than a gallon a day.

Barack Hussein Obama.  Hussein?! Good or bad?  It depends upon the audience.  

McCain was outraged by the utterance of….oooooohhhhh……..please, please don’t say it….Hussein. Hussein.  Hussein.  Hussein.

Lamar Alexander picked up the phone and delivered a Tennessee GOP slapdown.  Don’t use it! Stop! Take it down! Tennessee Dem Party Chair Gray Sasser said “well, I’ve never!”

Barack Hussein Obama. Gasp!!

But in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic, Barack contends that his middle name is a benefit to Middle East relations. Holy cow! How can this be?!

From Goldberg:

JG: Why do you think Ahmed Yousef of Hamas said what he said about you?

BO: My position on Hamas is indistinguishable from the position of Hillary Clinton or John McCain. I said they are a terrorist organization and I’ve repeatedly condemned them. I’ve repeatedly said, and I mean what I say: since they are a terrorist organization, we should not be dealing with them until they recognize Israel, renounce terrorism, and abide by previous agreements.

JG: Were you flummoxed by it?

BO: I wasn’t flummoxed. I think what is going on there is the same reason why there are some suspicions of me in the Jewish community. Look, we don’t do nuance well in politics and especially don’t do it well on Middle East policy. We look at things as black and white, and not gray. It’s conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, “This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein, and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he’s not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush,” and that’s something they’re hopeful about. I think that’s a perfectly legitimate perception as long as they’re not confused about my unyielding support for Israel’s security.

 

The media loves to challenge the veracity of pastors who financially prosper from their ministries.  The left challenges the oil industry because they actually make profits in their business.  But what about Al Gore? Nary a peep.

Gore Financially Invested in Climate Cause
By Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
May 14, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - Weeks before announcing a $300-million, three-year advertising campaign to raise awareness about global warming, Al Gore was conducting a slide show for a group of investors in Monterey, Calif., touting companies such as Bloom Energy, Amryis , Mascoma and other firms that are not household names — yet.

These bio-fuel and green technology firms could be poised to take off, Gore told his audience.

“Here are just a few of the investments I personally think make sense,” he said during the March 1 presentation. “I have a stake in these so I’ll have a disclaimer there.”

Politicians are quite the disgusting lot.  Bredesen and his media friends want you to believe he’s a great businessman willing to make sacrifices.  But if you’re a taxpayer who stays informed, you know the truth. Governor Bredesen has been on the march, with the help of his Revenue Commissioner Reagan Farr, to get more of your money.

Bredesen believes he is better equipped to spend your money than you are.  Just send it to him and he and the pandering politicians will reallocate.

The Quote of the Week from Revenue Commissioner Reagan Farr is an amazing moment of truth for what is really going on behind the curtain in Nashville:

“The commissioner said his department is prepared to respond to legislator requests for other revenue-enhancing options. He declined to say what they might be.”

So, is this the truth?  Are legislators asking for more revenue?  Is Farr blame shifting or being honest?  I want to know who are the legislators asking for more dollars. And let’s dispense with the language, shall we?  Revenue-enhancing options means more taxes on you!  Less money for your gas tank!  For your family! 

But it looks like one tax is down in the “Technical Corrections Bill” but the digital/iPod/ringtone tax is still alive and well, at least from what I read this morning in the revised edition available at the News Sentinel website. I’m not sure why, but Tom Humphrey didn’t address the controversial digital tax issue, but  Governor Bredesen and his Revenuers are moving ahead with separating more money from your pocketbook and your family because the digital tax language is still in the legislation.  

Millions and millions of dollars of your money are involved by instituting a digital tax and for those legislators  who vote for keeping this new-tax-language, well, we’ll add that to one more reason to boot you out of office following two unprecedented years of budget surplus.  Such a vote will make a nice, glossy mail-piece.

From Humphrey:

NASHVILLE - Gov. Phil Bredesen’s administration retreated Wednesday from a push to require that some commercial real-estate holdings pay business taxes - at least temporarily.

The provision in question, which had become the focus of growing opposition and lobbying from affected businesses, was part of a 77-section “technical corrections bill” containing multiple changes in the state’s tax code.

The controversial section was deleted with the administration’s approval during a meeting of the Senate Tax Subcommittee, which then unanimously approved the overall bill. Some other provisions also were dropped. The overall bill, SB4173, was then approved unanimously by the subcommittee.

But no word on the digital tax and I see by reading the text of the revised bill that the language remains. Remember this, gentle reader.  Remember.

You can slap lipstick on a pig but she’s still a pig.  You can call a tax increase a “technical correction” but it’s still a tax increase.

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research has issued a press release on the “Technical Corrections” bill:

Department of Revenue Proposes $30.3 million Tax Increase on Tennesseans           
Administration’s “Technical Corrections” bill would tax music downloads, free hotel breakfasts

 NASHVILLE – The Tennessee Center for Policy Research condemns an intrusive $30.3 million tax increase proposed Monday by the Tennessee Department of Revenue. The proposal, known as the “technical corrections bill,” taxes gym memberships and complimentary hotel breakfasts, as well as iTunes and other media downloads. Further, the bill recommends a $15 million tax on commercial rents collected by family-owned, non-corporate entities, which were previously untaxed in Tennessee.

 “The Department of Revenue claims the technical corrections bill isn’t a tax increase, but that’s ridiculous,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson. “Thirty million dollars won’t fall from the sky, it’ll come out of the pockets of hard working Tennesseans.”

 Among the proposed new taxes are:

·         A $15 million yearly tax on certain family-owned real estate property.

(more…)

From Little Green Footballs:

To this day, Barack Obama continues to insist he was shocked and surprised to discover that Reverend Jeremiah Wright had bizarre racist views.

Now Tom Blumer has discovered images of Wright’s radical newsmagazine Trumpet—and look who was featured on the cover of that magazine at least three times:BizzyBlog - Attention Stanley Kurtz, Re Obama, Wright, Trumpet: I’ve Got You Covered.

Head on over to LGF and see a listing of those on the Trumpet Magazine cover including Obama and Farrakhan, but noticably absent: Martin Luther King, Jr.

Meanwhile, the message of change resonates globally as Palestinians are busy phone-banking for Obama. From Amanda Carpenter:

A television news segment produced by Al-Jazeera shows Palestinians in Gaza engaging in phone banking activities for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The segment explains how young Palestinians have banded together to call American voters at random asking them to vote for Obama.

“It all started at the time of the US primaries,” says one of pro-Obama Palestinian organizers. “After studying Obama’s electro campaign manifesto I thought this is a man that’s capable of change inside of America. As for potential change in the Middle East, he can also do that if he can bring peace to the area. At least this is what we hope.”

Times are a’changing in Nashville.  The Tennessee Senate seems to be stepping away from the tradition of legislating like a club and has moved full steam towards legislating as a deliberative body.  And with differing of opinions that are actually expressed, tempers will flair, indeed.  But no punches were thrown and no state troopers grabbed anyone by the neck, so all’s good for now as the Senate wrangles with the Tennessee Plan.

From the Nashville City Paper:

If the Judicial Selection Commission expires next year (the Legislature could extend it in 2009), the state could return to contested judicial elections in 2010. Some GOP senators argue that contested judicial elections are constitutional while the current retention elections aren’t.

Some legal interest groups have opposed those reforms, and compromise efforts have failed. House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh (D-Covington) said he would still try to work with Ramsey on compromises, and the House passed a bill 64-34 extending the Judicial Selection Commission. 

“This is not a partisan battle,” Naifeh said. “This is a bill that is good for the judiciary of this state.

Senate Republicans though, as result of the so-far failed compromise efforts, say they are content to let the judicial panel go into wind down, said Sen. Jack Johnson (R-Brentwood), a member of the government operations committee.

“Basically, we are committed to taking the special interests out of our judicial selection process,” Johnson said. “If we have to go to elections to get that done, we will.” 

Personally, I think we do need to go to elections.  Some Republicans are trying to split the baby on this one, in my humble opinion.  They want more input in case they take charge.  But I trust that when it comes to crime and punishment, law and order, voters will choose a more conservative justice.  Granted, going up against Trial Lawyer and NEA dollars is always a challenge in a judicial race for the Supreme Court,  but nevertheless, I like elections.  

And what do you think of Naifeh saying this isn’t a partisan battle?  I just threw up in my mouth a little. Give me a break, Saint Naifeh.  Good grief.  

And Senator Kyle (D) pulls out the “just vote for the plan because Wilder is just old, he’s just, well, old” speech:

Kyle said the Republicans mistreated the 86-year-old Wilder by “essentially making John Wilder beg them to vote for the bill.”

“I thought it was a real sad day to treat a member like that,” Kyle said afterwards. “The manner in which John Wilder was treated today would be inappropriate for any senator, particularly a fellow who’s been here for 40 years.”

Come on, Senator Kyle.  Even Wilder said:

“I’m not the issue. The issue is the Tennessee Plan. I’m not the issue.” 

(And remember, we’ll discuss this issue today on the radio with Brian Fitzpatrick.  Tune in!)

Memphis Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen(D) compared Hillary Clinton to Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction. I hate to break it to Congressman Cohen, but apparently the proverbial Joe Six-Pack ain’t all that hip on Barack Obama.  Trouble ahead for Dems and fly-over country.  Should Obama truly close the deal, our pathetic GOP candidate might be able to appeal with his military credentials and outsider image.  

The mainstream media won’t say it.  But I will.  How in the heck does she blow him out by this wide a margin when the talk is all Obamamania!!  That’s just a spanking right there.  Nothing but a spanking. While it may be downplayed in the media, no doubt insider Dem strategists will be examining the results as a November problem.  It will take more than Obama putting on the lapel pin! 

And silly McCain will probably keep trying to move more and more to the left.  He’ll blather on about more global warming junk, etc. when there will be a traditional, cultural vacuum left should Obama clinch the deal.

From a snapshot at the WSJ:

And here’s some exit polling from CNN.

Here’s the original on Cohen from ABC News:

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn, an Obama supporter, compared Clinton to the Glenn Close character in “Fatal Attraction” — a spurned woman turned stalker who was apparently drowned in a bathtub only to jump up one more time to be shot dead.

“Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub, and Sen. Clinton has had a remarkable career and needs to move to the next step, which is helping elect the Democratic nominee,” Cohen said during a local TV interview. He later apologized for his comments.

Republicans who have been losing their national brand name as the party of smaller government and low taxes, have relied on the very group they are often embarrassed of to propel them across finish lines: social conservatives. But as I’ve written about many times before, if a Democrat takes those issues from us, uh-oh….he can win.

Too smart by half.  Is that the old saying?  

Another GOP seat down, from Jackson, Miss.:

JACKSON, Miss. — It’s becoming a disturbing trend for Republicans: losing traditional GOP strongholds to Democrats in some hard-fought congressional races.

It happened again Tuesday, as Travis Childers beat Greg Davis in a special election to replace Republican Roger Wicker, who served in the House since 1994 and was appointed to the U.S. Senate to fill the seat vacated by Trent Lott.

and yep, here it is:

Childers is a socially conservative county official, while Davis is mayor of a fast-growing city across the state line from Memphis, Tenn.

Oh, it sounds like an issue that will throw you into a boredom induced coma, but it’s all about your right to vote.  Pay attention to this issue.  Study it.  And please, let your opinion be heard.  Contact your State Senator and State Representative.  

Tomorrow on the radio program, we’ll be interviewing Brian Fitzpatrick.  Mr. Fitzpatrick authored a terrific study on the Reauthorization of the Tennessee Plan.  Should appointment decisions be pulled out of closed meetings?  Should you be able to vote on your Justice?  From how I read it, it looks like the Tennessee Constitution guarantees your right to vote.

Mr. Fitzpatrick addresses that question and more in his study that you can find here and here. He’ll be with us at 3:00 pm Eastern if you want to tune in.  Here’s a brief intro:

A Report on Reauthorization of the Tennessee Plan

February 25, 2008

Brian Fitzpatrick

In June of 2008, some of the operative provisions of Tennessee’s method of selecting appellate judges—called the “Tennessee Plan”—will expire unless they are reauthorized by the Tennessee Legislature. Under the Tennessee Plan, judges are initially appointed by the Governor from a list of three names selected by a nominating commission made up primarily of lawyers who belong to special lawyer’s organizations. After a period of time, these judges then have their names put on the ballot in uncontested retention referenda where voters are asked whether to keep the judges appointed by the Governor. Ever since the Tennessee Plan was enacted to replace contested elections in 1971, it has been controversial, and, for much of its history, it has been mired in litigation. Indeed, just last year, the Governor was so unhappy with the work of the nominating commission that he brought a lawsuit against it that went all the way to the Tennessee Supreme Court.

It looks like the tax increases planned by Governor Bredesen and Revenue Commissioner Reagan Farr may be in trouble. The bill has stalled.  And it appears it will remain in that state–a legislative coma, if you will.

From Tom Humphrey at the KNS:

NASHVILLE - A bill that would bring an estimated $27.2 million in new state revenue stalled in a Senate committee Monday after some provisions were criticized by lawyers and lobbyists representing affected businesses.

Gov. Phil Bredesen, meanwhile, said he viewed the so-called “technical corrections bill” as “a very appropriate thing.”

“It’s hard to imagine why the legislative leadership is so interested in protecting a small loophole for a bunch of well-off people,” the governor said in responding to a question at a news conference.

Wow.  Somebody call Dave Cooley back into the circle of advisors.  He would have never let Bredesen say anything snooty like that.

Are family owned businesses are a “bunch of well-off people?” And this from an accomplished businessman like Bredesen who could certainly PERSONALLY finance the Party Bunker construction?

Gee whiz.  Where’s Dave Cooley?  Bredesen’s killing himself.

Here’s the news:

Two Washington, D.C., attorneys criticized another provision of the bill that would change the language in Tennessee law for taxation of downloaded books, movies and music.

Farr contends such downloaded items are already clearly taxable under a law that took effect Jan. 1 and were arguably subject to tax before that. Most major sellers of downloaded goods are already paying Tennessee sales tax, Farr said.

But Stephen P. Kranz, who said he advised companies including Microsoft and Time-Warner, and Marie Kalamaras Lee, legal counsel on tax policy for the American Electronics Association, said they disagreed with Farr’s interpretation.

I’m no attorney, but from my little ‘ole common sense perspective, I disagree with Farr’s interpretation as well.  Farr contends that a music file, or similar downloaded file, is actually a piece of software that performs a function on your computer or iPod.  Hmmm.  In carrying forward this legal form of gymnastics, would a youtube video be software?  I’m not seeing it. (And note, as I posted earlier, previous letter rulings agreed as well.)

When the bill came up for a vote, Senate Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Haynes, D-Nashville, declared he wanted to amend the bill to delete both the FONCE provision and the downloading tax provision.

Thank you, Senator Haynes.

With that, Sen. Jim Kyle, D-Memphis, sponsor of the “technical corrections bill,” asked for an indefinite delay in the vote. He noted that Bredesen is counting on the $27.2 million in new revenue - $15 million of that coming from the FONCE provision - toward balancing the state’s budget in a time of cutbacks.

Thanks to bipartisan support against these new tax provisions, it looks like Tennesseans will keep more of their hard-earned dollar in their pockets.

Please note: It’s not completely dead.  Stay alert and in contact in with your State Reps. and Senators. Bredesen will no doubt be twisting arms and offering what taxpayer funded goodie-baskets he can dig up in a very tight year.

Other than the War on Terror (and honestly I don’t know if McCain is more committed to preventing an American black-eye or if he truly understands the Islamo-fascist threat) and no pork via the earmark system, I don’t know heck of a lot where I agree with Senator John McCain.  

At a recent Lincoln Day event here in Anderson County, Congressman Zach Wamp gave it his best effort in promoting McCain.  There wasn’t too much applause in the way of cheering on a guy like McCain who doesn’t agree with the grassroots on a long list of issues. And Wamp wasn’t really tossing out any red-meat to the crowd himself, choosing instead to thank the numerous Republicans in the crowd who’ve worked on numerous occasions against our GOP candidates, and in fact, have even worked on the campaigns for Democrats.

Afterwards, Lee gave Wamp his advice for McCain.  Judges.  That’s it.  That’s the only area where a conservative might be willing to pull the lever, punch the button, and then puke or shower off after the fact.

I thought of Lee’s conversation when I saw this ad by the RNC over at Pajamas Media this morning.

By the way, our own statewide radio host Steve Gill writes regularly for Pajamas Media now.  He makes Tennessee proud on this national forum. Be sure to check him out every week.

Whether it’s global warming or illegal immigration, McCain likes pulling off a Michael Flatley on the heads of the GOP faithful. Drilling in ANWR?  No way.  McCain compares the frozen tundra to one of the seven natural wonders of the world.

McCain’s list:

• Grand Canyon
• Great Barrier Reef
• Harbour of Rio de Janeiro
• Mount Everest
• Aurora
• Parícutin volcano
• Victoria Falls
• ANWR

Illegal immigration?  We racists just don’t understand.  But the race-baiting La Raza?  Yep, McCain’s there to reach out!

And the list goes on.  This campaign on both sides—that’s the Dems and the R’s—are both in a race for the elites.  The forgotten fly-over country, the land of the average six-pack, Bible-believing, gun-toting Dem, Independent, or R–has been pushed aside in both primaries.  

Is it because politics has become such an extraordinary money game?  You know, you can’t get the dollars by appealing to middle-class values?  The average working man can’t send in the dollars for campaigns when he’s putting extra dollars into his gas tank?

This campaign season is really quite anti-climatic given the frenzy of modern political times.  It’s an exercise in big-government folly, rhetoric filled with ideas about how government is going to save us.  You know what I’m talking about, all the plans for growing this baby even more.  

The underlying premise is that America is too stupid to solve our own problems.  Heck, even my Republican Senator Lamar Alexander’s energy “Manhattan Project” is premised on the belief that it’s going to take government to get us out of the mess that government actually got us into.  

Oh, and I’ll deal with that one later.

No, McCain is the current recipient of the Dem blood-bath taking place right now.  And by the way, 55% of Democrats still want the race between Barack and Hillary to continue.  But because McCain has this all wrapped up regarding his GOP nomination, it’s not like we don’t have our own war going on (witness the protest votes against McCain in recent primaries as well as the Ron Paul uprising).  The Dem-Lites attempting to lead our GOP right now are trying to kick the hayseed, Bible thumpers as well as the libertarian, small government conservatives to the curb.

And McCain may win that way.  But I’m sorry, I don’t see any evidence that that strategery will work for the GOP down ballot.

I encourage you to start calling, writing, or emailing your Republican Party leaders–the RNC, the McCain Campaign Headquarters, the Senatorial Committee, the State Party–and express your opinion.  They need to know where you stand and what you’re thinking.

And on that note, how do you like my idea for the McCain ‘08 bumper sticker:

McCain: Shut-Up and Maybe We’ll Vote for You.

Senator Obama discusses his campaign:

57 American states?  Following the dust-up over his remarks, the official Obama geography expert responds:

So maybe Barack Obama just doesn’t have a map?  OK?

El Rushbo gave a mention to another “57″ that’s found in this little factoid.  I’ve pasted from Wikipedia.  

The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It groups 57 nations, most of which are Islamic, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkan, Southeast Asia, South Asia and South America. The official languages of the organization are Arabic, English and French.

And speaking of the Muslim issue, there was an interesting piece in the New York Times of all places that discusses Barack’s religious heritage.  The author, Edward Luttwak, questions whether that heritage will actually make Barack a better diplomat in relations with the Muslim world given the religious codes in regard to apostasy. Here’s a brief pull-out, put please read the entire piece:

Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.

At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.

That an Obama presidency would cause such complications in our dealings with the Islamic world is not likely to be a major factor with American voters, and the implication is not that it should be. But of all the well-meaning desires projected on Senator Obama, the hope that he would decisively improve relations with the world’s Muslims is the least realistic.

Edward N. Luttwak, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is the author of “Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace.”

And via a heads-up from Little Green Footballs, Patrick Poole gives us this alarming news:

State Department diplomats are taking full advantage of their new rules prohibiting the use of “jihad,” “jihadist,” and “mujahedeen” to describe Islamic extremists and terrorists, which they apparently have taken to mean that there are no jihadists in light of the exchange programs they have recently sponsored for the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT) — an organization currently under active federal grand jury investigation for terrorist support activities.

 

There’s a great piece over at American Thinker by Ned Barnett contemplating the “what if” scenarios that might play out for Hillary.  What if Hillary has the proverbial October surprise in July?

Here’s a brief:

The “sitting and waiting” strategy is out of character for the politically-savvy Clintons. It’s possible they may be shell-shocked from the primary campaign’s insane roller coaster ride.  However, once they have caught their breath, they may decide that the prize is worth exercising Hillary’s “nuclear option” — in effect, using surrogates to nuke Senator Obama so thoroughly that they will create that Obama Can’t Win scandal out of what is already out there.

 

In this option, Clinton surrogates — those public figures who are obviously in the tank for the Clintons, such as Lanny Davis and Paul Begala, as well as those who are not so obviously affiliated with the Clinton campaign — will carry out the “nuke Obama” strategy on Senator Clinton’s behalf, leaving her hands clean and her reputation unsullied.

 

What constitutes the Nuclear Option?

 

Senator Obama has gotten such a near-universal pass on his background that there remain potentially troubling elements to his career and life-story.  Bringing these forward now and painting them in the worst possible light could have a “death by a thousand cuts” impact on the largely untried Senator from Illinois, who has already shown that he’s not at his best in responding to harsh and unexpected criticism.  Keeping Senator Obama dodging and ducking and bobbling defenses creates two opportunities:

 

• Senator Obama’s background will deliver that one “deal-killer” issue that will turn the superdelegates away from their popular favorite, or

• The weight of unanswered criticism will collectively convince the superdelegates that Senator Obama can’t win, and that the Party needs a win more than it needs Obama

Both options are long shots, to be sure, but there may be enough out there with which to criticize Senator Obama to make the nuclear option at least plausible.  Some might even say that the nuclear option campaign has already begun with Paul Begala’s public pronouncement that the Party Can’t Win by relying on white eggheads and African-Americans, a bombshell he dropped on CNN in a “debate” with Democratic strategist Donna Brazile.

Knox County Commissioners jumped from the ropes and put the atomic elbow to the toll road idea.  The vote?  18-1 against the blasted idea! But there’s always a but in there somewhere…

Check this out from the Knoxville News Sentinel:

“Ed Cole (of the Tennessee Department of Transportation) has gone on record saying if they don’t have local support, it won’t go forward,” said Fairstein, a member of Citizens Against the Orange Route.

Cole, TDOT’s assistant commissioner for environment and planning, said after the commission’s vote that the state indeed will pay close attention to local legislators and residents when considering toll roads.

“We are not going to pursue a tolling project where there is strong opposition, and the County Commission represents the people of Knox County,” Cole said. “The county would make a big impact on our thinking.”

But he said TDOT will pay the most attention to the Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization, a federally mandated group of officials from Knoxville, Knox County and surrounding cities and counties formed to provide coordinated planning.

Please, read that again.  BUT TDOT will pay the MOST ATTENTION to the Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization.

Ding!  Ding!!  Ding!!!

I had this exact conversation with State Representative Harry Brooks (R) from Knoxville.  Rep. Brooks voted in favor of the toll road expansion legislation.  He said he did so because people would have the final say.  I argued that the people wouldn’t, they would only be allowed INPUT.  Or gripe sessions, if you will.  The place for the people to have their say would be in the legislature in putting a stop to this idea.

And so now, from the TDOT horse’s mouth, we see the truth revealed.

As we saw earlier from this so-called planning board, the ratio of taxpayers showing up to voice their opinions was 2 for and 28 against the toll roads, but this board voted in favor of spending the dollars to move ahead anyway!

I was watching Justice Antonin Scalia being interviewed the other night on the television program Book Notes on C-Span.

Justice Scalia is an awesome and brilliant man.  If you missed the interview, you can check it out on at C-Span online. I thought I’d share something Scalia said about his wife that I thought was pretty neat about child rearing.  Here’s the transcript of Scalia’s comments about some of his wife’s child rearing theories:

As for – as far as child rearing, I’m probably a little tougher than she is, although I don’t now that for sure. I think she tries to, you know, rein me in, but on the side she herself may be tougher.

She’s a good – a very good mother. I mean, has all sorts of theories on child rearing. She ought to do a book. Her greatest theory is this. Since when a child reaches the teenage years the child is going to revolt, I mean that is a given. That’s what being a teenager is all about, asserting your own personality.

Since that’s true, the rules you’ve set have to be just short of what is reasonable. That is to say, just short of what would harm the child. You know, if you’re only, oh, do everything, so long as you don’t use drugs, you know, so long as you don’t hurt yourself. The kid’s going to use drugs if that’s the only way he can revolt. You have to have some irrational rules, like be home at 12:30, you know.

Kid gets to be a teenager, he comes home at 12:45, you throw a fit. The kid is pleased that he’s asserted himself. I think it’s a real insight that you have to set your rules a little short, a little short of what will harm the child.

I think that sounds like smart advice.

The Club for Growth released their Congressional scorecard for 2007 today.  From the Club for Growth, here are the rankings for our Tennessee members.  And note that Congressman Marsha Blackburn is one of the top ranking members in all of Congress.  She wins a coveted award from the organization. Congratulations, Congressman Blackburn!

Washington - Today, the Club for Growth released its 2007 annual scorecard, awarding the Defender of Economic Freedom award to six senators and forty-nine representatives who scored a 90 or above on the Club’s scorecard (see here).

“These top-scoring members of Congress are staunch defenders of American taxpayers,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “Their votes are critical to lowering taxes, cutting wasteful spending, and promoting economic growth for all Americans. The Club for Growth scorecard allows taxpayers to see how their senators and representatives are performing in Congress and find out who is truly fighting for pro-growth, limited-government policies. We hope that support for pro-growth principles will continue to grow, allowing more members to earn this award and more Americans to benefit.”

The ratings are based on a comprehensive examination of votes in the House and Senate pertaining to key economic issues, including taxes, wasteful spending, entitlement reform, free trade, and regulation. Each lawmaker is given an economic growth score ranging from 0 to 100, with a score of 100 indicating the highest support for pro-growth policies. The Club is also introducing a searchable database that allows you to search past and current scorecards by party, state, house, and member.

And Club for Growth President Pat Toomey had a wonderful opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal today on RINO Hunting.  Here’s a brief, but I encourage you to follow the link and read the entire piece:

Republicans would be better off, the argument goes, if the Club PAC spent its money targeting Democrats instead of liberal Republicans. This is the argument of politicians who care more about maintaining power than using that power to implement conservative policies.

Amen, brother Toomey! And this:

In 2000, Rep. Tom Davis, then the chairman of the National Republican Campaign Committee, denounced the Club for supporting Scott Garrett’s challenge to New Jersey Rep. Marge Roukema. Mr. Cole and the entire Oklahoma establishment backed Tom Coburn’s primary opponent in the 2004 Senate race, Oklahoma City Mayor Kirk Humphreys, viewing Mr. Coburn as too conservative to be electable. Led by President Bush, the GOP cavalry rallied behind liberal Arlen Specter in 2004, and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Joe Schwarz of Michigan in 2006.

Mr. Chafee, you may recall, is the same senator who refused to vote for the president in 2004, and voted against the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and Justice Sam Alito’s nomination.

This year, Mr. Gingrich and conservative favorite former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele stumped for liberal incumbent Rep. Wayne Gilchrest against conservative state Sen. Andy Harris in a primary. Mr. Gilchrest was also defended by the Service Employees International Union. He lost by 10 points.

Let us take a moment to consider how these liberal Republicans are serving the GOP today. Mr. Specter, just in the past year, joined Democrats in voting for “card check” (which allows unions to organize without holding a secret ballot election), for increasing the minimum wage, for expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for the bloated farm bill.

Mr. Chafee, who was defeated, switched his party affiliation to Independent and has endorsed Barack Obama for president. Following his loss to conservative Tim Walberg in the 2006 primary, Rep. Schwarz of Michigan backed a state-level tax hike, and threatened to run against Mr. Walberg as a Democrat. Mr. Gilchrest has hinted recently that he will endorse the Democratic nominee for his seat. All four of these pols were heralded by the Republican establishment as genuine conservatives who would go to bat for the party when it mattered.

In language usually reserved for military engagements or tragedies like Virginia Tech, first lady Andrea Conte amps up the rhetoric for us Tennessee hayseeds who don’t believe spending millions on an underground party bunker is really a wise investment of Tennessee taxdollars.  

Today on the radio, we’ll interview Drew Johnson, President of Tennessee Center for Policy Research, about some of the emails he obtained through an open records request.  Here’s a shocker from the first lady, via the Nashville Scene:

In December, the libertarian Tennessee Center for Policy Research (TCPR) made a public information request for emails from Gov. Phil Bredesen’s administration on the proposed renovation of the governor’s mansion, including the construction of the so-called “Bredesen Bunker.”

and:

In December, Conte, who has been the public face of the project, sent a note to state architect Mike Fitts. Here Conte—who is referred to as “FL,” for first lady, in many administration emails—comes off as part Cruella de Vil, part Christian motivational speaker as she encourages Fitts to continue touting the project in the face of bitter criticism.

“You are doing a magnificent job of deflecting hits and correcting erroneous information regarding Conservation Hall,” the FL writes. “This is an innovative design and a long time coming—what a shame partisan political hacks have targeted the project out of meanness of spirit and selfishness.”

Conte concludes her note with a hearty dose of good cheer.

“Keep a song in your heart and a smile on your face” the FL assures Fitts. “We will prevail.”

We will prevail?  How about building a bunker for the child molesters currently sitting under house arrest because there is no room at the Gray-Bar-Hotel called our state prison?  I don’t know if a party bunker is an issue where we need to march on with such courage.  Revealing.

Also on the radio today: we’ll interview Dan Gainor about the new four letter word for libs: COAL.

There was an interesting piece of analysis found yesterday over at National Review:

Put Away Those Calculators   [James S. Robbins]

Why would anyone believe the the Democratic nomination race is over or soon to be? The analysts who are fascinated with mathematical models allocating delegates this way or that are missing the point. This is a political process. The Clinton campaign has netted about 48% of the delegates so far. That keeps her in the game.

All she has to do is post a reasonable number of victories in the remaining primaries and caucuses to show she is viable, and that Obama is beatable. And even if the superdelegates start moving his way, that will not be decisive. The superdelegates are only stating their intent; nothing is official until the actual votes are cast, and, as we have seen, superdelegates can change their minds. The real struggle will be in the leadup to the Democratic convention and in the committee rooms in Denver.

In 1980, Ted Kennedy went to the convention with around 36% of the delegates and still mounted a floor fight. Harold Ickes, now Clinton’s chief delegate hunter, was then in a similar role on the Kennedy campaign. Ickes had a much weaker hand in 1980 than he does today. So how can anyone believe this struggle is not going all the way to Denver? It will only end if Hillary Clinton loses the will to keep fighting. It all comes down to her inner strength, her belief in herself and her destiny. Right now the only person who can prevent Hillary from taking this all the way is Hillary.

Marc Sheppard has a good piece up at American Thinker.  As the Swiss debate plant dignity by the way, real people are suffering throughout the world, like those who can’t get help in Burma thanks to their own government…

And like Cindy Sheehan and other hyper-political activists did in Hurricane Katrina, Gore can’t wait to wave his global warming flag in the face of tragedy.

May 07, 2008

Gore’s Myanmar Words as Inopportune as they were Repulsive

Marc Sheppard

Thirty days after Steve McIntyre caught NASA cooking climate history again - this time in a feeble attempt to somehow conceal the alarmist-embarrassing  downward trend since 1998 — Al Gore shamelessly portrayed Saturday’s Myanmar cyclone catastrophe as a ‘consequence’ of global warming. 

 

A mere 16 days after NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory confirmed that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation’s cool phase shift would likely bring colder temperatures for as many as the next 20-30 years, Gore told NPR that the “trend toward stronger and more destructive storms appears to be linked to global warming and specifically to the impact of global warming on higher ocean temperatures.”  This just 6 days after a German study also predicted cooler ocean temperatures due to the Meridional Overturning Circulation entering a weak cycle, and in spite of there being absolutely no empirical evidence of a global warming / storm strength link. 

You would think Gore might use his bully pulpit to address these facts, from IBD:

The Burmese government, which controls the media and was given 48 hours of notice by the Indian government that a natural disaster of biblical proportions was brewing, did not provide an adequate warning.

Even if they had been notified, the people were mortally vulnerable. Blame the socialist junta. More interested in keeping itself in power, the regime has never developed an economy that would improve living standards and protect humans from the elements. It is guilty of economic oppression and the sort of corruption that too often plagues socialist systems.

Because of its secretive and xenophobic nature, the regime has compounded the disaster through a reluctance to accept international aid.

Dear Lord.  How did we get here?

From the Weekly Standard, Wesley Smith looks in at the Swiss ethical dilemma of the day:

You just knew it was coming: At the request of the Swiss government, an ethics panel has weighed in on the “dignity” of plants and opined that the arbitrary killing of flora is morally wrong. This is no hoax. The concept of what could be called “plant rights” is being seriously debated.

and this:

The committee offered this illustration: A farmer mows his field (apparently an acceptable action, perhaps because the hay is intended to feed the farmer’s herd–the report doesn’t say). But then, while walking home, he casually “decapitates” some wildflowers with his scythe. The panel decries this act as immoral, though its members can’t agree why. The report states, opaquely:

At this point it remains unclear whether this action is condemned because it expresses a particular moral stance of the farmer toward other organisms or because something bad is being done to the flowers themselves.

What is clear, however, is that Switzerland’s enshrining of “plant dignity” is a symptom of a cultural disease that has infected Western civilization, causing us to lose the ability to think critically and distinguish serious from frivolous ethical concerns. It also reflects the triumph of a radical anthropomorphism that views elements of the natural world as morally equivalent to people.

And we see the paradoxes at play even here in the states in stories like this one:

A man was just trying to go green with his new house construction project in Denver, until he was told by the city he would be penalized $9,000 for doing so.

The report comes from William Porter, a writer for the Denver Post, who outlined the situation confronting Kent Oakes.

“Oakes and his wife want to build a home on South Birch Street in University Hills. They plan to scrape the existing frame house and replace it with the one in which they’ll spend their retirement years,” the newspaper reported.

“We want to build it as green as possible, and that includes solar panels on the roof,” Oakes reported.

But when workers from the solar system company arrived, they brought with them some bad news: a large honeylocust tree that towers over the southwest corner would block the sunlight to the system.

“It is a good tree and I’d like to keep it, but it just won’t let the solar work,” Oakes told the newspaper. In getting approval from the city for his plans, he noted that the tree would have to go.

All right, responded Douglas Schoch, of the city’s forestry division. But that will be a penalty of $9,000, because that’s what the city has decided the tree is worth.

There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago on Obama and the Teamsters.  I’ve pulled out a few highlights:

By BRODY MULLINS and KRIS MAHER

May 5, 2008; Page A1

Sen. Barack Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters earlier this year after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption, according to officials from the union and the Obama campaign.

It’s an unusual stance for a presidential candidate. Policy makers have largely treated monitoring of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters as a legal matter left to the Justice Department since an independent review board was set up in 1992 to eliminate mob influence in the union.

and this:

The consent decree required the direct election of the union president and other officers by rank and file members, in an election overseen by a court-appointed election officer. (Before, the president was elected by delegates.) It also set up a three-member independent review board to investigate corruption within the union. These elements of the decree are in effect today, while others, like oversight of union finances, have ended.

and this:

But the Teamsters still face skeptics. In 1999, Mr. Hoffa hired Edwin Stier, a lawyer with experience fighting union corruption, to create an internal program to root out mob ties and help end the consent decree. Mr. Stier quit in 2004, saying Mr. Hoffa wouldn’t fully support his efforts. “I haven’t seen anything that the union has done internally that comes close to self-policing,” Mr. Stier said in a recent interview.

A Teamsters spokesman says the union doesn’t want to duplicate efforts of the oversight board. But if the board were no longer in place, he says the union would handle such matters itself. 

Before:

And after:

So what do you think will happen with Hillary?  Will she continue to fight on?  Will she start the exit process?

Personally, I think Hillary has performed the most impressive makeover of modern times.  She used to be the lady of the left, the GOP voodoo doll symbolizing all things Marxist, Socialist, Counter-culture.  

She may not pull this one out.  But she’s savy.  While the Code-Pinko left and all the university marxists and anti-war crowd are all clamoring for their political Messiah to fill their spiritual voids, Hillary will probably receive little or no recognition for her efforts to keep the Democrat label mainstream.

Feather boas, screaming, Che Guevara posters, and sugared-up expensive coffee are all images that come to mind when I think of Crowd Obama.  But Hillary has kept Dems on the map.  She’s reached out to 2nd amendment voters.  She’s moderated.  She’s has talked about a gas tax moratorium. She says that if that crazy Iranian is foolish enough to attack Israel, she’ll obliterate him.

She made a decision to move center.  It might have paid off, or who knows, there are very remote possibilities that it still could.  But I don’t think going into this race anyone ever thought that identity politics would deliver a near unanimous vote from the black community for Barack.  You’d have thought with all the work Bill and Hill had done, they could garner at least 20%.

Should her exit be in the works, I don’t think she’s exiting stage left.  Barack, with Ortega and Carter and Tom Hanks and Michael Moore all cheering him on, has become the new enemy of conservatism.  Hillary doesn’t evoke the same emotion.

She laughs.  She has become human.  And if indeed she’s moving on, she’ll live to fight another day with a new and improved image.  Her decision to move center instead of battling it out for the moonbat fringe may help the Democrats in fly-over country. Is her conversion for real?  Doubtful. She’s a Clinton. But her makeover has been quite the success.  What she does with that capital, we’ll just have to wait and see.

UPDATE: Paul Begala puts it another way: 

BEGALA: We cannot win with egg heads.

Let me finish my point.

We cannot win with egg heads and African-Americans. OK, that is the
Dukakis Coalition, which carried ten states and gave us four years of
the first George Bush.

So are we going to be taxed on our digital downloads?  It ain’t over until the fat lady sings.  And with the discovery of new information in Tennessee, it doesn’t like she has sung.

My music download today is from the Eagles:

You can’t hide your lyin’ eyes 
And your smile is a thin disguise 
I thought by now you’d realize 
There ain’t no way to hide your lyin eyes 

In the dust-up over the new ringtone & iPod tax coming down the pike, Revenue Commissioner Reagan Farr stepped onto the scene and flashed some Apple iPod receipts that showed that Tennesseans were already paying taxes on their music downloads.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I must tell Tom Humphrey and John Rodgers, two very fine Tennessee reporters, that they’ve been had.  And it looks like they’ve really, really been had by the confidence trick of the year.

This girl felt uneasy as Farr said folks were already being taxed, we really do just need a technical correction.  As I said in my last post, trust but verify.  If we’re already collecting, why the need to change the status of a digital product delivered electronically via the internet for example, to a tangible product?  As it turns out, Farr wants to change the legal status in order to legally collect the tax!

In the verification process, I’ve discovered a ruling that for some reason is not posted with all other rulings on the Tennesseee Department of Revenue’s website.  Why is it hidden?  Why does one have to wade through hell and high water to find the truth?

As revealed in Letter Ruling No. 08-25 issued March 12, 2008, a ruling that is being kept under wraps from the public eye, all song downloads or background music downloaded or accessed via the internet are not subject to the sales and use tax because they are delivered electronically.

If you go to Wally World and buy music on a CD, it’s taxed.  You can hold that tangible CD in your music-loving hands.  Buy a device, an ipod or MP3 player for example,  that may or may not have tunes already installed, then you must pay sales tax at the point of purchase.  You’re holding that tangible little device in your little fingers.

But download a ringtone or a song via the internet, you ARE NOT SUPPOSED to pay tax.  According to the ruling referenced above, such goods delivered electronically are not taxable by Tennessee statute according to Tennessee Code as sales of telecommunications services or sales of tangible personal property.

So why am I paying a tax on my iPOD for my iTunes?  Sometimes companies like Apple collect the tax when a question exists.  They’d rather err on the side of safe, so they collect the tax until they hear otherwise.

So does Commissioner Farr know he shouldn’t be collecting the tax?  Is he using Apple’s safe-bet of collecting taxes until a ruling comes down the pike as a way to actually institute tax policy within the Revenue Department?  

It’s looking that way.  I hate to say that.  Really, I do.  But I’m looking at the date of this ruling, March 12, 2008.  And then I look at the last words appearing on the ruling and they say “APPROVED: Reagan Farr.”  And then I look at the Tom Humphrey article dated April 25.  Nearly six weeks passed  between the ruling and the interview.  By the time of the interview, Farr has to know Tennesseans SHOULD NOT be paying the tax!

But he doesn’t say that.  In a post by A.C. Kleinheider over at Nashville Post, Reagan Farr makes the claim that according to TCA, “Downloads are considered tangible personal property by the State. According to Farr, under Tennessee code an ITunes song is considered “pre-written computer sofware” [T.C.A. §§ 67-1-102 (60)] that then “performs the task“[T.C.A. §§ 67-1-102 (17)] of playing on your iPod. It is thus taxable under Tennessee law.”

But I’m not seeing that in the ruling that Mr. Farr approved on March 12, 2008. The ruling specifically says: “However, the Additional Song Dowloads and [DATABASE III] services, in addition to any charges for [PACKAGES ONE],[PACKAGE TWO], [PACkAGES THREE], and Background Music service, that relate to additonal songs downloaded onto the hard drive or accessed via the Internet are not subject to the sales and use tax because the music is delivered electronically, which is not taxable as sales of telecommunications services under TCA 67-6-102(81)(B)(ix)(Supp.2007) or as sales of tangible personal property under Tenn. Code. Ann 67-6-102(80)(Supp. 2007).”

Attention legislators: You DO NOT need to approve this change as a technical correction.  Attention legislators: You will be instituting a NEW TAX if you approve the change!!

You also need to ask why the Revenue Department is keeping this information hidden from the public eye.  And why Tennesseans have been lied to. And why Apple has not been informed that they shouldn’t be collecting the tax.  

 And as it turns out, it looks like the law firm that first issued a memo was actually right.

In his day, Soapy Smith was king of what’s known as the short “con.”

Revenue Commissioner Reagan Farr’s digital download tax:  Honest mistake?  Or Confidence Trick?

It’s not looking good.  But giving Farr the benefit of the doubt,  I’m willing to be open and hear his explanation.

From reading the ruling, it all looks pretty clear to me.

Here are the pages from the ruling:

UPDATE: BILL HOBBS HAS MORE.  Rick Forman has a great point in the comments section at Bill’s site. 

AC has more too at the link in the comments section.  AC is doing great work on the subject.  

Representative Stacey Campfield has some summary comments.

There’s a good editorial over at the Tennessean on the open records games being played in the legislature.  I’d rather see the update to the open records killed than see the intimidation tactics codified.  The amendments are all about re-election efforts, a heads-up if you will, on what may show up in a mail piece.

From the Tennessean:

Sometimes, it seems some state lawmakers believe they’ve been elected to a private club, where they can then operate by concealing all the private club’s private records.

That’s the only conclusion to draw from amendments thrown into a good open-government bill in the House this week. A Senate companion bill under discussion is therefore better.

The House State and Local Government Committee passed a bill that seriously hurts and complicates the original legislation. The committee approved the bill in a way that will require notification of public officials when any records requests concerning those officials are made. That is an intimidating element to put in the legislation. It will have the effect of dissuading citizens from seeking requests. It will also be a needlessly time-consuming process to find out if a records request involves officials whom would need to be notified — which ironically is an issue being raised by lawmakers concerned about the overall intent of improving open-records laws.

Further, as amended, the House measure extends the length of time a request for records can be complied with, from five days to seven business days.

The amendments are designed to make it more difficult — not less — for citizens to gain access to public records. One amendment also means out-of-state residents may not always have the same access as Tennessee citizens, and the measure requires an ID for records requests.

John Rodgers at the Nashville City Paper reports:

House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh said Thursday he doesn’t believe the Democratic Party’s image was damaged through killing a bill revoking health benefits for convicted lawmakers.

Earlier this week, the House Calendar and Rules Committee effectively killed legislation that would revoke state health insurance benefits for lawmakers convicted of felonies involving their office.

Said Naifeh in the article:

Naifeh said he did not believe the bill’s demise gave off a bad impression for the Democratic Party’s ethics.

On this rare occasion, I actually agree with the Speaker. He’s right. It doesn’t damage the ethics of the Democrats in Tennessee. How do you possibly go down from having none? With Naifeh and his Dembots in control, they’re actually running a deficit in the ethics department! Throw Rep. Ulysses Jones in the mix and they may never claw their way out of the hole!

What is this?  This picture of Democrat State Representative Jim Hackworth was sent out on one of his mailers during the last election.  In the mail piece, he’s sitting with several young photo-op children and he’s showing them this piece of paper.

I saved it because I thought it was hilarious.  He’s showing the kids a blank sheet of paper!!  Or maybe he’s just showing the kids everything he knows about good government.  Or immigration?  Or life? Or how much money he wants the kiddies’ parents to have left in their account?  Or maybe he’s showing them the number of times he has voted against Boss Naifeh?

Hilarious.  

Have fun kids!  This looks like a fun lesson with a fun teacher!

This should be the Tennessee Democrat Party’s 2008 Campaign Poster.

As we know from earlier this year, Speaker Naifeh and his Dembots killed several pro-2nd amendment bills. One bill sponsored by East Tennessee State Representative Frank Nicely basically said that your 2nd amendment rights don’t stop at the state park.  

Well, here’s the news on our federal parks from Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling.  

A Second Amendment Victory
Posted by: Rep. Jeb Hensarling (05-01-2008, 12:29 PM)

Yesterday, Secretary Dirk Kempthorne updated the Department of Interior’s national park and wildlife refuge regulations.  Under the new regulations, law-abiding citizens would be allowed to possess, carry, and transport concealed and operable firearms in national parks and refuge areas in the same way they would on similar state land.  Their decision reversed a 25 year old regulation that banned firearms in national parks – regardless of state and local laws.

Earlier this year my friend Doug Lamborn (R-CO) and I  introduced the “Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act of 2008,” to prohibit the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service’s inconsistent and unconstitutional regulations that ban law-abiding citizens from carrying firearms on land managed by these agencies.  The bill is a House companion to Senator Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) Senate legislation. 

I was pleased to see that Secretary Kempthorne reviewed and updated the Department’s regulations to recognize the rights of law-abiding citizens who visit national parks.  This is a victory for personal freedoms, and those who hoose to exercise their constitutional right to protect themselves and their families while enjoying America’s vast natural landscape.  We must never allow bureaucrat-birthed regulations to take precedence over state laws and the constitutional rights of the American people.

Hopefully Representative Nicely will try again on his legislation next year.  This new ruling lends support to his effort.