Blogroll

ConservativeNC Blogroll

3/11/10, EUROPE: Strike Paralyzes Greece: Protests Turn Violent. If only taxpayers got as mad about being ? »»

3/11/10, WHY DIDN?T DEMS GO WITH A SCOTT BROWN ?SCANDAL? STORY? The first several Gawker comments are all hi? »»

3/11/10, Quotes of the day »»

3/11/10, Epic Stupidity »»

This is one of the most appalling news stories I've seen in a long time. It's from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and it isn't a parody: "Study finds median wealth for single black women at $5."

The "study" apparently was done by the Insight Center for Community Economic Development, based in Oakland, California, with an assist from another Oakland outfit, the Closing the Gap Initiative. So blame them, not me, for slandering African-American women:

In a groundbreaking report released Monday by a leading economic research group, social scientists turned a spotlight on the grave financial challenges facing an often overlooked group of women, many of whom could not take an unpaid sick day or repair a major appliance without going into debt.

Or, if you believe them, buy a cheeseburger.

Among the most startling revelations in the wealth data is that while single white women in the prime of their working years (ages 36 to 49) have a median wealth of $42,600, ... the median wealth for single black women is only $5.

That's startling, all right. I don't think it's right, but to the extent that there is some kernel of truth there, what could the cause be? The Post-Gazette's last paragraphs--the most appalling of the piece--suggest an answer:

Ms. Lui [director of the Closing the Gap Initiative] said the Insight report would be used to encourage the government to close the wealth gap and improve the outlook for women of color, just as it did for Americans who received land through the Homestead Act, and education through the GI bill.

"If wealth was based on hard work, African-Americans would be the wealthiest people in our nation," she said. "It's not about behavior. It's about government policies. Who does the government help and who is it not helping?

"Our government knows how to build wealth for people. They've done it for others and they can do it for all of us. They need to focus some attention on women of color. Look at the situation and see what we need."

How about this for a revised headline: "Those who believe that government handouts are the only path to prosperity have median wealth of $5."

Via Repubclic.

3/11/10, Some Remarkably Cool Photos »»

3/11/10, Graham to Obama: If you use reconciliation on health care, it?ll kill amnesty »»

3/11/10, What's Wrong with This Picture? »»

3/11/10, Group Demands Olbermann Apologize for Comparing Jewish Attorney to Nazi Collaborator »»

The Media Institute, a Washington-based non-profit, has called on Keith Olbermann to apologize for comparing one of its Jewish staff members to a Nazi collaborator.

During a January 21 screed regarding the controversial Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission -- in which the Supreme Court granted all companies the same rights as MSNBC's parent company GE -- Olbermann called the Media Institute's Floyd Abrams, a Jew, "the Quisling of freedom of speech in this country."

Vidkun Quisling, for those who don't know, was a Norwegian Nazi collaborator who aided in the Third Reich's conquest of his country by disclosing vital defense information to the Nazis. If Benedict Arnold had been complicit in genocide, we might consider Quisling his Norwegian equivalent.

The Media Institute wrote Olbermann an open letter yesterday calling on him to issue a public apology:

As members of The Media Institute?s First Amendment Advisory Council, we are writing to take strong issue with your ?special comment? of January 21, 2010, in which you personally attacked one our members, the preeminent First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams, for his role in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Just to be clear at the outset, we are not concerned about the fact that you expressed a strong opinion about a Supreme Court case that has generated a great deal of public comment and controversy. Quite to the contrary, we celebrate the fact that you are free to express your opinions without fear of government reprisal. Many of us admire the fact that you emerged as a prominent critic of federal policies at a time when many others were still trying to find their voices.

But our admiration stops when confronted with the type of personal invective that you heaped upon Mr. Abrams for the fact that he represented a client whose position you dislike in Citizens United?

Floyd Abrams is the foremost First Amendment advocate of our time. He also is Jewish. For any Jew to be compared to a Nazi collaborator is vile, but in the case of Floyd is simply beyond comprehension. But your offhanded inclusion of this ugly epithet points to a deeper problem that has degraded public discourse ? the breakdown of civility?

Many of the freedoms you enjoy as a journalist exist because of the work of Floyd Abrams throughout his exemplary career. Yet even if Mr. Abrams had not blazed important paths for the rights of the press, he does not deserve to be personally insulted, which for you may have seemed like nothing more than a clever turn of phrase.

Of course, you have the right to say what you did in your ?special comment.? None of us questions that, and each of us would be willing to defend against any attempt to suppress your speech. We do not doubt your rights ? just your judgment. It does not endanger free expression to counsel self-control and civility.
Reasonable minds can differ on the Supreme Court?s Citizens United decision, and we fully expect it will be just the beginning of a continuing contentious debate on campaign speech and regulation. We look forward to your contributions to that debate. But we also look forward to your public apology to Floyd Abrams for your unwarranted personal attack.

If Olbermann does apologize, don't be surprised if it sounds somewhat like his apology to Sen. Scott Brown.

Olbermann has left us no reason to believe he has any interest in contributing to the ongoing debate over free speech in this context. Godwin's law has become his modus operandi.

3/11/10, A wrench in Dems? Wreckonciliation plans, but? »»

Photoshop: Leo Alberti

Some cold water thrown on the cramdown, ram-through, promise-we’ll-amend-it-later plans of the Democrat ruling majority. Curses, foiled again:

The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress? original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday.

The Senate Parliamentarian?s Office was responding to questions posed by the Republican leadership. The answers were provided verbally, sources said.

House Democratic leaders have been searching for a way to ensure that any move they make to approve the Senate-passed $871 billion health care reform bill is followed by Senate action on a reconciliation package of adjustments to the original bill. One idea is to have the House and Senate act on reconciliation prior to House action on the Senate?s original health care bill.

Information Republicans say they have received from the Senate Parliamentarian?s Office eliminates that option. House Democratic leaders last week began looking at crafting a legislative rule that would allow the House to approve the Senate health care bill, but not forward it to Obama for his signature until the Senate clears the reconciliation package.

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) moved Thursday to put Senate Republicans on the defensive over health care, sending a letter to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in which he dared the GOP to vote against reform.

Reid also defended the Democrats? use of reconciliation to get a final health care reform bill to the president?s desk, noting that the bulk of health care reform was approved under regular order via the package that cleared the Senate on Christmas Eve. Reid also emphasized that Republicans have used the procedure several times over the years.

But hey, noooooobody’s talking reconciliation, right, Harry?

***

What now? With the Slaughter solution toast, Philip Klein reports on the House Dems’ next move coming Monday:

Rep. Paul Ryan says that Democrats are ready to ram a “shell” health care bill through the Budget Committee, on which he serves as ranking Republican member, to use as a vehicle to impose national health care.

In a phone interview with TAS Thursday afternoon, Ryan said that he expects Democrats to begin the complex process on Monday, under which they would have the Budget Committee approve a phantom bill by midnight, which they will then send over to the Rules Committee. At that point, the Rules Committee will strip out all of the language in the phantom bill, and insert the changes to the Senate bill that Democrats have negotiated.

“They don’t have the votes right now, but they’re creating the vehicle so that they can airdrop in whatever changes they want,” Ryan said.

He said that Republicans are outnumbered 2-to-1 on his committee and don’t have the votes to stop the bill there. Democrats will also be able to prevent Republicans from offering any amendments, but GOP members will be able to offer “motions to instruct” the Rules Committee, that Ryan said will be used highlight problems with the “unprecedented” step that Democrats are taking.

He said he expected Democrats to dust off last year’s health care bills from the Education and Labor and Ways and Means Committees, to use as the vehicle for reconciliation changes.

3/11/10, Gibbs: 'Supreme Court Shouldn't Have Been Uncomfortable At SOTU, It Was Their Decision' »»

3/11/10, Holding Corruption-Enabler of the House Nancy Pelosi accountable; GOP resolution on Massa ethics probe passes 404-2 402-1; roll call vote added »»

Yesterday, Glenn Beck asked me how the Massa Mess affects Americans personally. My answer: Massa-gate isn’t just about Massa. It’s about Nancy Pelosi (full transcript):

GLENN: Do you think how I ended the show last night is how I started the show. I said, you have to ask yourself these questions and then you have to say, does it affect me. And I’m not interested in theoretical news. I’m only interested in the news that I can apply to make myself better or our country better.

MALKIN: Yes.

GLENN: And I don’t think this affects anyone at this point. Now it’s just theoretical because I don’t think they are really going to clean anything up. It’s like Charlie Rangel. They are not going to clean it up. If it affects them, if it helps them, they will clean it up. If it doesn’t, they don’t care.

MALKIN: Yeah. Well, I’ll say that it affects folks to this extent. This isn’t just about Eric Massa, and we know that. This is about a House ethics committee that is essentially a corruption enabling cesspool and has been under both Republican and Democrat administrations. And to the extent that your audience and activists and people who care about integrity and government and returning this government to the limits and the constitutional accountability that it should have, I think that pointing to the House ethics committee and this shadow office of congressional ethics that was set up in the wake of the Abramoff scandals is something that you can do. I mean, here you have a woman who got up, wields her gavel and then invokes her gender as some sort of sense of moral superiority that now that a woman is in charge, we really will drain the swamp? Somebody needs to hold her accountable for those promises. And that’s people who are going to be able to go to the polls in 2010 and 2012 and people who are going to be able to run office and show these creepocrats and corruptocrats how to run a clean government.

Today, the GOP stepped up to the plate with a privileged resolution directing the Ethics Committee to fully investigate what House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs knew prior to March 3, 2010 regarding the allegations against former Rep. Eric Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer took after learning of the allegations. The resolution directs the committee to report its findings and recommendations no later than June 30, 2010.

Here’s the full text:

H. Resolution ______

RESOLUTION

Raising a question of the privileges of the House.

Whereas, on March 8, 2010, Representative Eric Massa resigned from the House;

Whereas, numerous newspapers and other media organizations reported in the days before and after Mr. Massa?s resignation that the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct was investigating allegations that Mr. Massa sexually harassed Members of his congressional staff;

Whereas, on March 3, 2010, Majority Leader Hoyer?s office issued a statement saying, ?The week of February 8th, a member of Rep. Massa?s staff brought to the attention of Mr. Hoyer?s staff allegations of misconduct that had been made against Mr. Massa. Mr. Hoyer?s staff immediately informed him of what they had been told?;

Whereas, on Thursday, March 4, Roll Call newspaper reported, ?Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she only learned Wednesday of misconduct allegations against freshman Rep. Eric Massa, though her staff had learned of it earlier and decided against briefing her. ?There had been a rumor, but just that,? Pelosi told reporters at her weekly news conference. ?A one-, two-, three-person rumor that had been reported to Mr. Hoyer?s office and reported to my staff which they did not report to me because you know what? This is rumor city. There are rumors.??;

Whereas, on March 11, 2010, The Washington Post reported, ?House Speaker Nancy Pelosi?s office was notified in October by then-Rep. Eric Massa?s top aide [Joe Racalto] of concerns about the New York Democrat?s behavior?;

Whereas, on March 11, 2010, Politico newspaper reported, ?Democratic insiders say Pelosi?s office took no action after Racalto expressed his concerns about his then-boss in October?;

Whereas, on March 9, 2010, The Corning Leader newspaper reported, ?Hoyer said last week he told Massa to inform the House Ethics Committee of the charges within 48 hours. ?Steny Hoyer has never said a single word to me, never, not once, not a word,? Massa said Sunday. ?This is a lie. It is a blatant false statement.??;

Whereas, numerous confusing and conflicting media reports that House Democratic leaders knew about, and may have failed to handle appropriately, allegations that Rep. Massa was sexually harassing his own employees have raised serious and legitimate questions about what Speaker Pelosi as well as other Democratic leaders and their respective staffs were told, and what those individuals did with the information in their possession;

Whereas, the aforementioned media accounts have held the House up to public ridicule;

Whereas, the possibility that House Democratic leaders may have failed to immediately confront Rep. Massa about allegations of sexual harassment may have exposed employees and interns of Rep. Massa to continued harassment;

Whereas, clause one of Rule XXXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, titled ?Code of Conduct,? states ?A Member, Delegate, Resident Commission, officer, or employee of the House shall conduct himself at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House?;

Whereas, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is charged under House Rules with enforcing the Code of Conduct;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED,

(1) The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is directed to investigate fully, pursuant to clause 3(a)(2) of House Rule XI, which House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs had knowledge prior to March 3, 2010 of the aforementioned allegations concerning Mr. Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer having any such knowledge took after learning of the allegations;

(2) Within ten days following adoption of this resolution, and pursuant to Committee on Standards of Official Conduct rule 19, the committee shall establish an Investigative Subcommittee in the aforementioned matter, or report to the House no later than the final day of that period the reasons for its failure to do so;

(3) All Members and staff are instructed to cooperate fully in the committee?s investigation and to preserve all records, electronic or otherwise, that may bear on the subject of this investigation;

(4) The Chief Administrative Officer shall immediately take all steps necessary to secure and prevent the alteration or deletion of any e-mails, text messages, voicemails and other electronic records resident on House equipment that have been sent or received by the Members and staff who are the subjects of the investigation authorized under this resolution until advised by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct that it has no need of any portion of said records; and,

(5) The Committee shall issue a final report of its findings and recommendations in this matter no later than June 30, 2010.

The House passed the resolution this afternoon. Details from The Hill:

The House voted Thursday to open an ethics investigation into what and when House Democratic leaders knew of allegations of sexual harassment against former Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.).

The House overwhelmingly backed a privileged resolution offered by GOP Leader John Boehner (Ohio) that will have the Ethics Committee look into what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and other Democratic leaders and staffers knew about allegations of sexual harassment against Massa, and when they became aware of the situation.

Boehner offered the resolution early Thursday afternoon, and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) called quickly for a vote.

Members of both parties voted overwhelmingly to support the resolution, which passed 4[0]4-2. No Democrats voted against the resolution, while two Republicans voted against it. The members of the Ethics Committee, which would conduct the investigation, voted “present,” as is custom.

During the GOP Mark Foley scandal, I condemned the apologists for Foley who pooh-poohed sexual predation on Capitol Hill. Now, we have liberal media buffoons doing the same. I agree with Tommy Christopher:

As the Eric Massa story continues to unfold, the media?s wall-to-wall coverage of it becomes thinner and thinner. On last night?s Countdown, fill-in host Lawrence O?Donnell spent 3 entire segments on the Massa story, alternately cracking wise about the Navy and obsessing over the sexual slang term ?snorkeling.?

…Lost in all of this, however, is the fact that there are big parts of this story that aren?t funny at all. The things that Massa is accused of are revolting abuses of authority. I have two sons of an age where someone like Massa could exert this kind of pressure, and you?d better believe I wouldn?t be laughing if someone tried to molest one of them as they slept. This isn?t a gay thing, it?s a predator thing.

While the absurdity of Massa?s public performances are undeniably funny, where is even an iota of outrage over what this guy is accused of doing? I haven?t seen it anywhere else, and I didn?t see it during last night?s Massa Opus. That is a disgrace.

So is the silence of Massa’s many tacit enablers over the years — including the sanctimonious Speaker of the House who promised us nothing less than “the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history.?

***

Update: Here’s the roll call vote overwhelmingly supporting GOP demand for Pelosi/Massa ethics probe — 404-2. The only two no votes came from Republicans Dana Rohrbacher of California and Tim Johnson of Illinois. Curious, no?

CORRECTION: That was the roll call vote to end debate before final vote on GOP resolution.

Here’s the correct roll call vote – 402-1.

Democrat Rep. Fattah was the only “no” vote. House Ethics Committee members did not vote, as is protocol. 12 other members voted “present.”

***

What did Nancy know and when?

Via the NY Daily News:

Disgraced ex-Rep. Eric Massa insists he never sexually abused anyone, but he filled his Capitol Hill rowhouse with low-paid male staffers in an arrangement ripe for trouble.

“It’s like he had people trapped,” said a Hill source.

Sordid new details emerged yesterday of a pattern of behavior that went back to his 20 years as a naval officer, as ex-shipmates came forward to describe incidents of groping and perhaps worse.

After resigning, Massa called his “inappropriate” behavior a carryover from his Navy days.

At the house on E St. Southeast yesterday, which Massa had shared with five of his staffers, clothes were piled on the floor and half-a-dozen pairs of shoes mingled with dirty towels next to an open pink suitcase in the living room.

A male staffer in his 20s who mans the front desk of Massa’s decommissioned House office appeared late in the day and went inside. He declined to comment, citing strict orders from the staff’s temporary employer, the House clerk.

In hindsight, Democratic insiders wondered about activities that before had just seemed odd. They said Massa hired a surprisingly large percentage of young gay men, and paid them so little that staffers were forced to live in the house with him.

“It’s not the gay part that’s a problem, it’s the abuse, if it’s true,” said one Hill source.

“The guy’s a freak,” a close friend of one embattled Massa aide told the Daily News.

Even as ethics officials apparently decided yesterday to drop their investigation of Massa because he is no longer in Congress, numerous new reports and interviews suggested there is much more to learn about the Navy vet.

3/11/10, Pence Won't Say Whether GOP Will Try To Repeal Health Care »»

3/10/10, The Quotable Stupak on Health Care and Abortion »»

3/10/10, Celebrating the Second Amendment: Introducing the KRISS Vector CRB/SO?.45 ACP A Post for Jessica B »»

3/10/10, Apple Grafting Class will be held at the Macon County Environmental Resource Center on March 16th »»

3/8/10, Who says that the tea parties aren't winning elections? »»

3/8/10, 2010: Beat the Arrogant Establishment »»

After the March 2nd Texas primary, CNN proclaimed "Tea party changes tone, but not outcome of Texas primary." Politico's Jonathan Martin asks, "Is the tea party movement a paper tiger?" Locally, a San Angelo, Texas paper framed the result as "GOP incumbents held seats against Tea Party."

This is a classic straw man, and a dramatic misreading of the tea party's political objectives.

Somehow, national media types got it into their heads that the tea party movement was the magic elixer for the kinds of unknown, underfunded and largely unskilled candidates who run in every race to claim the mantle of "tea party candidate" and knock off incumbents. A perusal of the Texas results at the Congressional level shows that the over/under for random, unknown unchallengers (a/k/a "tea party candidates") to incumbents was about 14%. This is basically the "none of the above" vote that materializes in every primary. When a prohibitive frontrunner has a semi-credible challenger, the frontrunner usually wins 70-30. Even when the challenger is unknown or unacceptable, 15 or 20 percent is doable. Convicted felon Lyndon LaRouche got that in some Democratic primaries against Bill Clinton in '96.

Beyond that, the subtext is also that the tea party empowers uniquely conservative candidates, with Rubio/Crist as the model for every primary in the country.

Again, no.

It's clear that there is a lot more primary activity than there was in '06 and '08, largely because the prospects of getting elected as a Republican this year are so good. And in those primaries, proclaiming oneself a "tea party candidate" is about as fashionable as proclaiming oneself a "social media expert."

Going state by state and district by district, the case for conservative ascendancy in primaries is muddled at best. For every Rubio/Crist, there is a Mark Kirk walk-in-the-park. The '08 primaries showed that Republican primary voters are if nothing else pragmatic.

A few basic misconceptions underlie the expectation that the more conservative the primary candidate, the better their chances are at winning. And the main one is that conservatives are uniquely advantaged this year because the tea parties show the party is moving right.

This notion would require one to believe that the grassroots base of the GOP -- not its leaders, but its base -- was somehow un-conservative prior to '09 and '10. There's no evidence for that. Fueled by Rush Limbaugh and talk radio, 1994 was a conservative year. In fact, 1994 probably marked the end of the shift in the ascendancy of conservatives over moderates in Republican grassroots politics, a shift that started with Goldwater. Ever since '94, the ideological change within the Republican Party has been marginal at best.

What has changed in the last two years, is that Republicans are now unshackled from having to defend the Bush Administration and the mood of the country, and inside the Republican Party in particular, has grown more solidly anti-establishment. Those changes alone can explain the emergence of the tea party movement.

While the case for conservative ascendancy in primaries is muddled, what isn't muddled is this: run as the milquetoast candidate of the arrogant establishment, and you lose.

Practically every electorally relevant example points in this direction.

NY-23? Check.

Florida Senate? Check.

Massachusetts? Check.

Texas Governor? Check.

In Texas, the tea party candidate was not Debra Medina. It was Rick Perry, whose political fortunes were revived around the Tax Day tea parties last year. That points to a movement that is much more broadly relevant than the marginal nutjob candidacies that media is holding up as an example of the movement's failures. I know that one can point to Medina strength among the organizers -- and I've certainly played up the role Ron Paul's brigades have played in that effort -- but there is a convincing case that the rank-and-file attendees and their compatriots who followed from the radio dial or Fox News were solidly with Perry. And that's who matters when delivering votes in a primary, as opposed to a straw poll.

But more importantly, the movement was aligned against Kay Bailey Hutchison, who barely disguised her sense of entitlement at holding not one, but two statewide offices. Strike one was trying to elbow aside Perry with a blatant "It's my turn" appeal not to run again, and then going ahead with a challenge. Strikes two and three were the Texas Two-Step around resigning her office, which, quelle surprise, will likely end up with Hutchison holding on to public office against her word.

The KBH fall is of a piece with the staggering fall of "All About Charlie" Crist, who ran on a sense of entitlement before he finished the job voters elected him to do. Only a few words need to be said about Charlie Crist: pride before the fall.

And NY-23 was a similar case of an arrogant establishment attempting to oppose its will against that of primary voters, and getting pwned in the process.

Do you see a pattern here?

Yes, each of these cases was one of a "conservative" beating a "moderate" -- but each also had the essential ingredient of a particularly noxious stench of self-entitlement on the part of the losers.

As ever, public servants need to place the emphasis on the latter part of that title: servant. Those advantaged by a long career of winning elections need to be particularly humble and even servile to the will of the electorate, especially in this environment. Votes cannot be assumed. They must be earned.

There is no easy template for tea party victory in a Republican primary. Saying you are Marco Rubio does not make you Marco Rubio. Rubio's success is due as much to Crist's arrogance and the movement-like aura Rubio has been able to build around himself as it is to a simple ideological contrast. Those whose job it is to run and win elections quickly learn that attributes -- those pesky personal qualities like honesty, integrity, intelligence, and authenticity -- matter a whole lot more than issues, even in primaries. This is not diminish the importance of principle but to acknowledge the reality that it alone is not enough, and having a good, plausible candidate, campaign, and message still matters a whole lot.

Average:

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

3/6/10, The World's Healthiest Dessert? »»

3/6/10, 7 Dumbest Ways to Accessorize Your Car »»

3/5/10, Daniel Pollitt rests at last »»

3/5/10, One Size Doesn?t Fit All for Stem Cells »»

2/28/10, Reader Mail: Oil/Gas Exploration Points by Kent Misegades »»

2/25/10, NAACP: "Don't Resegregate Our Schools" »»

2/11/10, Free Beer! »»

2/3/10, Here's a little something for those who don't think health care "reform" is toast »»

2/1/10, Bad News for the "Just Give Them Some Condoms" Crowd »»

1/4/10, New day, new blog »»

1/3/10, The prisoner »»

I am a moderate claustrophobe, so this story about how many unemployed or underemployed Japanese have been reduced to living in slots in the wall ("capsule hotels") literally made me shiver. And then Ross Douthat directed me to Tony Judt's essay about living with Lou Gehrig's disease. Contemplate the horror of this man's life:

In effect, ALS constitutes progressive imprisonment without parole. ... By my present stage of decline, I am thus effectively quadriplegic. With extraordinary effort I can move my right hand a little and can adduct my left arm some six inches across my chest. My legs, although they will lock when upright long enough to allow a nurse to transfer me from one chair to another, cannot bear my weight and only one of them has any autonomous movement left in it. Thus when legs or arms are set in a given position, there they remain until someone moves them for me. The same is true of my torso, with the result that backache from inertia and pressure is a chronic irritation. Having no use of my arms, I cannot scratch an itch, adjust my spectacles, remove food particles from my teeth, or anything else that--as a moment's reflection will confirm--we all do dozens of times a day. To say the least, I am utterly and completely dependent upon the kindness of strangers (and anyone else).

During the day I can at least request a scratch, an adjustment, a drink, or simply a gratuitous re-placement of my limbs--since enforced stillness for hours on end is not only physically uncomfortable but psychologically close to intolerable. It is not as though you lose the desire to stretch, to bend, to stand or lie or run or even exercise. But when the urge comes over you there is nothing--nothing--that you can do except seek some tiny substitute or else find a way to suppress the thought and the accompanying muscle memory.

But then comes the night. I leave bedtime until the last possible moment compatible with my nurse's need for sleep. Once I have been "prepared" for bed I am rolled into the bedroom in the wheelchair where I have spent the past eighteen hours. With some difficulty (despite my reduced height, mass, and bulk I am still a substantial dead weight for even a strong man to shift) I am maneuvered onto my cot. I am sat upright at an angle of some 110° and wedged into place with folded towels and pillows, my left leg in particular turned out ballet-like to compensate for its propensity to collapse inward. This process requires considerable concentration. If I allow a stray limb to be mis-placed, or fail to insist on having my midriff carefully aligned with legs and head, I shall suffer the agonies of the damned later in the night.

I am then covered, my hands placed outside the blanket to afford me the illusion of mobility but wrapped nonetheless since--like the rest of me--they now suffer from a permanent sensation of cold. I am offered a final scratch on any of a dozen itchy spots from hairline to toe; the Bi-Pap breathing device in my nose is adjusted to a necessarily uncomfortable level of tightness to ensure that it does not slip in the night; my glasses are removed...and there I lie: trussed, myopic, and motionless like a modern-day mummy, alone in my corporeal prison, accompanied for the rest of the night only by my thoughts.

Of course, I do have access to help if I need it. Since I can't move a muscle, save only my neck and head, my communication device is a baby's intercom at my bedside, left permanently on so that a mere call from me will bring assistance. In the early stages of my disease the temptation to call out for help was almost irresistible: every muscle felt in need of movement, every inch of skin itched, my bladder found mysterious ways to refill itself in the night and thus require relief, and in general I felt a desperate need for the reassurance of light, company, and the simple comforts of human intercourse. By now, however, I have learned to forgo this most nights, finding solace and recourse in my own thoughts.

The latter, though I say it myself, is no small undertaking. Ask yourself how often you move in the night. I don't mean change location altogether (e.g., to go to the bathroom, though that too): merely how often you shift a hand, a foot; how frequently you scratch assorted body parts before dropping off; how unselfconsciously you alter position very slightly to find the most comfortable one. Imagine for a moment that you had been obliged instead to lie absolutely motionless on your back--by no means the best sleeping position, but the only one I can tolerate--for seven unbroken hours and constrained to come up with ways to render this Calvary tolerable not just for one night but for the rest of your life.

I cannot imagine what that brave man is living through. I literally cannot imagine it -- the psychological horror is too great for me, with my claustrophobia, to contemplate. God help him and comfort him through this endless crucifixion. Read Judt's entire essay for a glimpse at the nobility of the human spirit.

Read this post »

11/3/09, Election Day 2009: A National Party No More? »»

“Uncivil war,” they’re calling it.

Family issues, more like.

The political mayhem surrounding New York’s 23rd House District special election has reached a crescendo, here on this final day of the campaign. November 3, 2009, is the day of reckoning for a grassroots conservative base eager to flex its muscle and make a statement about the future of the Republican Party going forth to the nationwide 2010 elections and beyond.

Commentators and observers of all stripes and sides have weighed in on the race, which proves to be a harbinger of things soon to come. Where they differ on is what exactly is soon to come. Is it the impending decline and relegation of the GOP to a permanent minority? Or is it, as those in the “tea party” movement see it, the beginning of a precipitous ideological takeback in the Republican Party of Reagan-ite/1994 proportions?

What’s most striking is the giddiness and dead-set certainty of both Democrats and ~~Republicans~~ conservatives in the rightness of their vantage points on the issue. Perhaps, as most conservatives would love to proclaim, “Dede Scozzafava is merely the first casualty of this war.” Perhaps NY-23 is just the beginning of “a nightmare scenario for Republican Party officials.” But therein lies the inherent problem with such lines of reasoning.

Democrats falsely assume that the strength of the Republican Party lies in the successes and failures of its “officials.” Sadly, NY-23 has shown that the NRCC, RNC, and MSM have joined the left in underestimating the raw power of the conservative (notice, not Republican) electorate. As if they needed reminding: the “Republican right” isn’t really Republican at all, at least not as much as it is ideologically conservative. As hard as it is for the D.C.-West Coast axis to believe, it appears that there may yet remain an American political party that is not subject to the whims of its talking head elites and special interest groups but that is truly of, by, and for the people who comprise it.

It’s quite a stretch to say that Hoffman-Scozzafava signals a movement to “purge” moderates from the party. Scozzafava was no moderate. Charlie Crist is a moderate. A moderate Republican who believes in card check and free-willy government spending is no moderate and certainly is no Republican. So this notion that conservatives are to blame for the death of “Big Tent” Republicanism is patently absurd.

If anything, it’s Scozzafava that has done the most damage to moderates in the Republican party by endorsing the Democratic candidate. Her bewildering move only proves her detractors right and only further cements the seeds of distrust in conservatives nationwide about other Republican moderates, of whom she claimed to be a part.

The AP is already pre-spinning a potential Election Day sweep by the Republicans as a moot point. No surprise there, but just as moot is the idea that NY-23 represents the beginning of the end for a bruised and battered Republican Party.

10/23/09, A Brief Hiatus »»

1/27/09, Tailpipe Emissions and NC: Ignore ?California-Envy? »»

President Obama has directed the EPA to reconsider California’s application for a waiver from federal tailpipe emission standards for cars and trucks. California is seeking to impose tougher standards than what is required under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

Under the CAA, only California can seek a waiver from federal motor vehicle standards (so long as their regulations exceed federal standards). Once California’s waiver has been granted, then other states can adopt California’s more stringent standards.

About a year ago, the EPA had denied California’s request for a waiver, explaining:

California?s current waiver request is distinct from all prior requests. Previous waiver petitions covered pollutants that predominantly impacted local and regional air quality. Greenhouse gases are fundamentally global in nature, which is unlike the other air pollutants covered by prior California waiver requests. These gases contribute to the challenge of global climate change affecting every state in the union. Therefore, according to the criteria in section 209 of the Clean Air Act, EPA did not find that separate California standards are needed to ?meet compelling and extraordinary conditions.?

Last year, some North Carolina legislators were trying to adopt California’s standards, even though it wouldn’t have been legal. The state’s Climate Action Plan Advisory Group (CAPAG), which was basically gamed to reach results that DENR and its “consultant” wanted, recommended that the California standard be adopted. If the waiver is granted, expect a big push to adopt California’s standards.

Expect the fleet mix to change in the state (i.e. what kind of cars are available) as well as cars to cost a lot more money (anywhere from $1,000-$3,000 more). These are just some of the costs. The benefit of such a policy would be non-existent.

The “father” of global warming hysteria, Dr, James Hansen, stated the following in trial testimony (link to a PPT file–also see this link)

Q: ?Have you modeled the CO2 emission savings that would result if only Vermont and New York were to implement the AB 1493 regulation [California’s regulations]??

Hansen’s Answer: ?I haven’t modeled that. It would not be difficult to do it.?

Q: ?Okay. Well, you have that model, one of the best in the country that you’ve got, correct??

Hansen’s Answer: ?Well, I wouldn’t run a model with such a very small change, because then you’re wasting computer time, because you do have the problem of finding a signal when compared to the natural variability of the climate.?

Q: ?You never modeled — let’s move past Vermont and New York. Let’s say that it’s all 11 states that have adopted the regulation. Have you modeled that? Have you found the computer time or the time to model the total CO2 emission saving in all of the states that adopted the regulation –?

Hansen’s Answer: ?No. Because we try to do useful things.?

If California gets the waiver and decides it doesn’t care about its economy or its citizens (which it doesn’t from its typical actions), then let it destroy itself. Some North Carolina legislators may have “California-envy,” but the legislature shouldn’t hurt the state’s citizens to appease a bunch of extremists.

1/14/09, Don?t Mess with Cats or Ecosystems »»

3/11/10, N.C. Democrats Jettison Gas Tax Relief »»

3/11/10, Easley Scandal Fallout Continues »»

3/11/10, Senator Burr Files Reelection Paperwork »»

3/11/10, Senator Burr Statement about the Sudden Termination of MyCAA »»

3/11/10, Blog moved to new location »»

3/11/10, Down and Down We Go »»

3/11/10, Is It Still Bush's fault? »»

3/11/10, Corey Thompson Announces Run For County Commission At-Large »»

COREY THOMPSON

Candidate for Mecklenburg County Commission At-Large

www.coreythompson.us

PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ? FEBRUARY 11, 2010

?CMS Teacher Pledges To ?Do More? In Filing For County Commission?

Charlotte, NC- Corey Thompson, a 34 year old Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools teacher, has announced his candidacy for the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners. Thompson plans to file as an At-Large candidate on Monday, February 15^th, at 4:15 PM at the Mecklenburg Board of Elections. This is the first time that Thompson has run for an elected office.

?I believe that the citizens of Mecklenburg County are looking for leaders who can identify with their day-to-day struggles, who will remain accountable to the public, and can restore trust in our elected officials. I believe that is exactly the type of leadership I can provide,? Thompson said.

The filing on Monday will serve a purpose other than just submitting the appropriate paperwork and fees to the Board of Elections. Thompson also plans to hold a school supplies drive in conjunction with making his candidacy official. In doing so, Thompson wants to raise awareness about his message of community involvement in helping solve problems throughout the county.

Thompson added ?In the wake of the current economic recession, our county leaders have had to make tough decisions in shaping our budget, especially in regard to education. County Manager Harry Jones recently stated that we all need to be prepared to ?do less, with less? in the coming days. I believe that the hard-working citizens of this community are growing tired of waiting on the government to solve their problems. That?s why I?m pledging to ?do more? with the help of the people, because I am confident that everyday citizens can be far more effective than a government with misguided priorities.?

School supply contributions can be dropped off to Thompson?s campaign team between 4:00-5:00 PM Monday in the Board of Elections parking lot, located at 741 Kenilworth Avenue. Those items collected will be donated to Classroom Central on behalf of the people of Mecklenburg County. Thompson will also make brief remarks to family, friends, and supporters after filing.

Thompson and his wife Jenny, also a CMS teacher, are natives of Mecklenburg County. The couple are proud parents of a 2 year old son named Charlie. Corey is a graduate of The Citadel, and has held numerous leadership roles in local organizations.

Thompson concluded with a final challenge: ?I want people to ask themselves one question. Is Mecklenburg County better off today than she was two years ago? If the answer to that question is ?no,? then I?m asking for the opportunity to earn your trust and your vote to help our community get back on a path toward prosperity. I believe in the spirit of Mecklenburg. I believe in our citizens, and with their help, I am confident that our best days are ahead of us.?

3/11/10, OK. Let's Talk Streetcar »»

I attended the City Council meeting last night for the main purpose of listening to the streetcar debate first-hand. It was about what I expected to hear, considering the makeup of the Council, but troubling, reckless, and a misguided Olympic-sized leap in the wrong direction.

Let's go over some things I jotted down from the presentation:

- The $25 million federal grant cannot be used for planning or design. It can be used for construction, right-of-way, and vehicles. However, the project must enter construction within 18 months. Thus, you get the 3-year figure from the Observer article.

- The total project cost is $37 million. On top of that, there is an annual operating cost of $1.5 million. that's assuming, of course, the project is on budget. How often does that happen? If you need an example, we just opened a light rail line in 2007 that came in over 200% of the projected cost.

- The ridership numbers are awfully low, the presentation stated it was 950 per day. Warren Cooksey pointed this out and I think it gave most sane audience members pause.

- No savings on CATS routes #7, #9, or the Gold Rush Red. So the streetcar is not replacing anything. Don't worry, it gets better...

- CATS currently has the Gamerco cars to use, the newer Siemens cars would be $8 million to buy new. Looks like CATS is using the ones already in existence.

- $12 million in local money is being used to fund the project, taken from 4 different city sources. The $1.5 million will come from the general fund starting in fiscal year 2013.

Susan Burgess delivered this gem, saying "we can afford this!" referring to the $12 million. Not that she would answer the question of what that $12 million could've been used for that would really help the area like fixing potholes, finishing backed up sidewalk projects, or keeping the integrity of the comprehensive transportation plan intact without pitting the Northeast Rail Line and the commuter North Line against each other.

Another bonus was State Senator Malcolm Graham attending and talking about the benefits of this thing, small wonder of course since he was on the streetcar committee and just so happened to advocate this plan, which takes the state money out of the equation and puts a bigger burden on the city government. The rail funding plan - 50% federal, 25% from the state and 25% from the city is now 2/3rds federal and 1/3 local. Anthony Foxx actually said this means for dollar we contribute, the federal government is contributing 2. Well, DUH. Foxx was playing this off as a good thing, when it is anything but. The state has no money, the federal government has no money, and apparently the city has $12 million sitting around that has to be spent on something.

The acceleration of the streetcar is, primarily, the City Council delivering on the Foxx campaign platform. While it's intended to build the eastern and western sides of the city, the only thing being paid for right now is still uptown as it stretches from the Transportation Center to Presbyterian Hospital. THAT'S THE ONLY THING BEING PAID FOR!

3 years out, let's assume that somehow everything has gone according to plan. Like Hillary Clinton, suspend your disbelief for a minute and follow me. 3 years from now, the debate will rage about whether to continue going west towards Beatties Ford, or bring the line to Cental Avenue and Eastland Mall. How are we going to solve this one, guys? There is no guarantee of a federal or even a state grant or funding source to pay for the next leg. At this point, we've spent the last 3 years elevating this project above a new rail line. The Northeast Line, which should be in the well into development, has not started. The city is divided and we have no direction or leadership. What was once a comprehensive plan is in tatters.

Is this what we want for Charlotte? A streetcar that doesn't replace anything and isn't funded beyond the 1.5 miles? We're going to feel this decision for a long time to come.

3/11/10, Radicalizing Civil Rights »»

3/11/10, GOP?s Job #1? »»

3/11/10, Week in Review 3/1/10 - 3/6/10 »»

3/11/10, Editorial Regarding the Proposed High Speed Rail »»

3/11/10, NCGOP Chairman's Race »»

The race for NCGOP Chairman has changed some and it is now down to two people - Chad Adams and Tom Fetzer. I have thought long and hard about this race and have now made up my mind. Before, giving my decision I want to lay out the race as I see it and tell why I have decided the way I have.

First , let's consider the candidacy of Tom Fetzer. Tom is a solid conservative who knows his way around the political structure and the hierarchy. He was elected Mayor of Raleigh which is a big accomplishment for a Republican. Tom did a great job as Mayor and proved to be what he said he was. Tom would make a great US Senator or Congressman. He would probably even make a great Governor of this state. He would be a prolific fundraiser as state chairman and he would be well accepted by the Washington based RNC. He has good conections in Washington ad he would do a great job leading the party in the reelection battle for Richard Burr, a god friend of Tom's.

Chad Adams in his role with the John Locke Foundation allowed him to eastablish himself as a leader. Chad had much contact with the grassroots of the partyy throughout the state and he proved to effective at bringing the mkessage of the John Locke Foundation to them. He has energy and a passion for restoring the party. He would likely need help raising the funds needed but he is committed to raising the funds the party needs. He is not as well known by the RNC crowd as Tom is but he has the personality and the style to get along and to be accepted. He has good conections with the grassroots of the party in North Carolina.

I think the bottom line in this race is the need for the new Chairman to renergize the base of the party throughout the state and to listen to the activists who get things done for the party. The grassroots of the NCGOP have become dissatified and they feel that the state party pays more attention to what Washington wants that what the state needs. The members of the State Executive Committee feels that the meetings are designed to keep them from saying what they want and to push a preformed agenda down their throats regardless of what the committee thinks. In defense of the leadership, a big part of that problem lies with members of the committee but that is a topic for another day. With this in mind, the biggest Tom Fetzer has is that he will be percieved as a Washington Chairman bringing more of the same to the job. That perception will cause far too many of the activists to stay away. It is primarily for this reason that I support Chad Adams for NCGOP Chair.

Chad can do the job. He will work full time. He will be responsive to the grassroots (if he isn't he will fail). Chad will figure out how to raise the money needed. He will provide the type of leadership the activists have been longing for. He will be a different leader and that is desired by those people who the party needs to gain back its brand. The Democrats have stolen the NCGOP's brand and the party needs to claim it back in no uncertain terms. I believe Chad is the candidate who best recognizes that and he will kead to get it back.
Read more...

3/11/10, Perdue Takes The Helm »»

Yesterday's inauguration in Raleigh brought North Carolina's first female governor into power, but that is not the real story. Yea, yea yea history is made with he first female governor blah blah blah. The electorate in North Carolina has a short memory and does not demonstrate itself as being very bright. Of course their are a number of important factors to this election that need consideration.

First, lets go back a short time and think about the big story, or stories to be more correct, that covered the scene and the media leading up to the election. Corruption corruption corruption conviction conviction conviction jail time jail time jail time. Get the point? The big story was the culture of corruption in Raleigh that went from the General Assembly, DOT, Boards like the Transportation Board, Lottery Commission and even out of Raleigh to local elected officials. The press moaned about the shame and how we needed to change and bring integrity and honesty back to North Carolina long known for clean government. Please! So what is the point? The point is that the electorate once again sent the same old crowd with the same old people back to Raleigh. Does anyone out there think anything will change? Is anyone out there paying attention? Does anyone out there care? That's all right when your taxes start going up and up remember why. Remember that you sent the same corrupt crowd that has been in the thick of the problem that has led us to where we are back to the helm to fix what they did, never to this day admitting that what they have done was wrong. Good Luck!

The second part to this story is who voted them in? I worked the polls on election as did many others I know. We were observers and promoters. I always love doing this because I would go outside and ask voters about the people they voted for. I worked a poll in Southeast Raleigh. I asked people one of three questions: 1. Did they vote for Beverly Perdue? 2. Who did they vote for for Congress? or 3. Do they think Kay Hagan will make a good Senator? All of the people I spoke with except one, voted a straight Democrat ticket and were proud to vote for Obama. None of them knew who Beverly Perdue was, none of them (except one who knew she voted for a woman for governor but did not know her name) knew who they voted for for governor and not one of them had any idea who Kay Hagan was. The liberal Democrat machine did its job. They elected a gang without the voters knowing who they were electing. It sure protects them from the corruption charges defeating them when they literally bus folks in who have no idea who they are voting for. North Carolina went from Red to Blue by the votes of many uneducated voters.

The third point is the disgraceful campaign run by the Republicans. With the exception of leaders like Skip Stam who worked hard to win in the State House, note here the Republicans held their own and did not lose ground in the General Assembly, the effort by Republicans was one of the worst in my memory. The McCain campaign was run by a bunch of bungling idiots who should all immediately retire from politics forever! The State GOP seemed to be more concerned with not offending anyone that with winning the election. The party apparatus seems to have forgotten that conservatism is what brought them to the table in a state run by Democrats for 200+ years. The GOP staff was better at making Republican activists angry than with getting them work harder to win. The NCGOP has a critical decision to make this June. They will elect new leadership and they had better get it right or they will not get enough seats in 2010 to sit at the redistricting table after the census. That, my friends, means another ten years of gerrymandered voting districts that will keep the Democrats in charge in spite of the fact they generally get fewer votes statewide for General Assembly races than the Republicans.

The final piece of the story may be the biggest. The mainstream media in this country has proven themselves to be the greatest threat to our freedom. In the 2008 election they finally abandoned any precepts of reporting the news and instead created an alternate reality in order to elect Barack Obama and a bigger majority in Congress for their liberal socialist agenda. The news was distorted and the media flat out lied to the public to achieve their goal of a socialist government. They will now push hard for, among other things, The Fairness Doctrine to shut up their opposition, Conservatives, to regain their monopoly on the "news". They will work very hard for the socialist elitist policies they have longed for since the sixties. They failed to get control in and after the sixties but they see their chance now. We has all better wake up. Look what has already happened: we have a political recession, nationalizing of financial institutions, nationalizing of the auto industry, a campaign to make all America believe that the only salvation is to rely on money sent to our mailboxes by our benevolent mother the Federal Government and a clear push to nationalizing our health care system. The conservative majority in this country and the entrepreneurs who have made this country the greatest one on earth better wake up and not allow the left to take away our freedom.
a
Read more...

9/21/09, ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20090918 »»

9/21/09, ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20090917 »»

3/11/10, A Comment On The Limitations of Electoral Politics »»

3/11/10, A Fair Tax [Penalty] Indeed »»

3/11/10, Raleigh N&O As Biased As Ever »»

The McClatchy Company?s Raleigh News & Observer?s editorial page, once strongly pro-John Edwards, is now just as strongly pro- Barack Obama.

But John Drescher, the paper?s executive editor, assures readers the N&O goes to great lengths to make sure its editorial biases don't creep into its news columns.

With Drescher?s assurance in mind, let?s compare newsobserver.com?s coverage of yesterday?s pro-Obamacare rally in Raleigh with its coverage of the Apr. 15 Raleigh ?tea party? rally.

Today?s headline

Pro-health reform rally draws 350

The headlines for the Apr. 15 rally:

"Tea party" gets pretty hot
Thousands of conservatives rally in Raleigh against taxes

As you can see, today?s headline gives no hint of the political orientations of the Obamacare supporters; and neither does the story which follows.

All the rally individual participants quoted today and all the sponsoring organizations are described, not by political orientations, but simply as supporters of health care reform and health care for all.

On the other hand, the N&O?s ?tea party? headline makes the unqualified and unsubstantiated claim the rally participants are ?conservatives.?

In the "tea party" story itself, the N&O uses the ?conservative? label three more times.

Yet most Raleigh ?tea party? participants were quick to tell reporters they had no strong party affiliation and considered themselves "unaffiliated" or ?independents.?

But the N&O chose to spin what the participants said. Here?s an example:

At age 65, Jim Lewis had never been to a protest, but the nationwide wave of anti-tax "tea parties" -- and the dismay among conservatives with the Obama administration's spending plans and bailouts that sparked them -- finally gave him cause enough.

If Jim Lewis had said ?dismay among conservatives? had led him to the rally, you can be sure the N&O would've eagerly quoted him instead of spinning to make it seem such ?dismay? helped bring him to the rally.

Here?s another example of N&O political spin from the ?tea party? story:

The protests -- which coincided with the deadline for income tax filings and were named to evoke the Boston Tea Party -- resonated with conservatives, who turned out by the thousands to more than 30 of the events around the state.

As polls measuring shifts in public support for Obama?s policies were showing then and continue to show, for the most part liberals were and are supporting his policies while conservatives were and are opposing them.

Its among independents that Obama?s support has dropped significantly.

So it seems reasonable to conclude the ?tea parties? have resonated rather strongly among independents.

But the N&O can?t bring itself to tell readers that.

Instead it misleads them by misusing the ?conservative? label.

A couple of other items - - -

In the N&O?s "tea party" report we find this:

The protesters were almost entirely white, a fact that hecklers in passing cars pointed out more than once. "All you white rednecks!" yelled one woman as she drove past the courthouse.

Today the N&O says nothing about the racial make-up of the Obamacare supporters.

Why not?

If it was proper to report the racial make up of the "tea party" participants, why not that of the Obamacare participants?

Also, many participants in yesterday?s rally were bused in from as far away as Wilmington and carried identical, professionally-produced signs. You can read more about all of that and view photos here at Conservative Nation.

But you won't read about any of it in the N&O.

The N&O has reported Dems' charges made with little or no proof that "town hall" meetings at which citizens have expressed outrage at the Obama administration's plans to socialize medical care are really just protests ?organized? by GOPers.

But when there?s easily documented proof that an Obamacare rally, which took place just a few blocks from its office, was heavily organized by Democratic Party interest groups and the state's NAACP chapter, the N&O says nothing.

Editor John Drescher?s right when he says the N&O?s political biases don?t ?creep? into its news columns.

They gush in.

Hat tips: Instapundit

Locomotive Breath

Read more...

3/11/10, Why Are Obama's and Dems' Numbers Dropping »»

President Obama's MSM flacks include ABC's Charlie Gibson and NBC's Brian Williams who pump hard for him in what their producers call "our networks' news reports."

But Gibsons's and Williams' producers and Obama's other flacks such as Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman must be worried.

As hard as they pump, spin and outright distort for Obama and his Dem congressional allies, both the President's and his congressional Dem allies' approval numbers continue to drop.

Why?

At least part of the answer is that tens of millions of Americans no longer count on MSM to tell us "that's the way it is today."

Instead, more and more Americans are paying attention to citizen journalists like Mike Williams whose news letter report today, Sunday, Aug. 23, follows:

Obama continues to slip in the polls. Rasmussen reports that 27% of voters now strongly approve of his performance as president, while 41% strongly disapprove. This gives him an index rating of -14.

Obama?s ten-year budget deficit projection is staggering. On Friday he raised it by a mind-boggling two trillion dollars. Then he walked out the door for a summer vacation at Martha?s Vineyard.

Is it constitutional for Obama to require every American to have health insurance?

Is Sarah Palin right that Obamacare envisions ?death panels? for end-of-life medical treatment? Obama says he?s offended, but others think Palin has a point. For sure America?s vets do.

Does Obamacare include taxpayer-funded abortions?

Did the White House illegally use taxpayer dollars to push Obamacare? More here.

Didn?t Bush try to tell us that Social Security is in trouble, and didn?t the Dems blow him off? Guess what?

Watch a Marine take Rep. Brian ?Brown Shirts? Baird (D-WA) to the woodshed at a town hall.

Is Iraq in trouble? Maybe, maybe not.

Would you be surprised to learn that Greenpeace has been lying about global warming?

Did the UK release Lockerbie mass murder Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi as part of a commercial deal?

Is Obama trying to recreate America in his own image?

Is Obama in over his head?

Mike

3/11/10, Penn State's Whiteout »»

3/11/10, To Boldly Go Where No College Has Gone Before »»

3/11/10, Penn State's Whiteout »»

3/11/10, To Boldly Go Where No College Has Gone Before »»

3/11/10, Do Our Kids Need To See This Art ? »»

3/11/10, I need to get back to blogging »»

3/11/10, Annexation and Reform 2010 Conference »»

3/11/10, Compromising on Annexation Reform Legislation? »»

3/11/10, TaxProf Blog: Tax Foundation: 52 Million (36%) of Tax Returns Pay Zero Income Tax »»

3/11/10, The Health Care Number You Didn't Hear »»

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/02/26/the_health_care_number_you_didnt_hear_98362.html

American health care is an accidental system. Private coverage - the type most Americans have - has its origins in the wage controls of the Second World War as employers offered rich health-insurance benefits in pre-tax dollars. Public coverage like Medicaid and Medicare, on the other hand, takes its inspiration from the Beveridge report in Britain, drafted in the early 1940s; Lord William Beveridge believed in zero-dollar health care - that people ought to pay nothing at the point of use. Today's American health care fuses these two systems, but with a common economic flaw: people are overinsured, paying pennies directly on every dollar of health service they receive.
The end result: for every dollar spent on health care in the United States, just 12 cents comes out of the individuals' pockets. Imagine what food costs might be if your employer paid 88% of your grocery bill or what a trip to Saks might be like if your company covered the vast majority of the costs of the shopping spree.
Far from addressing the 12 cent problem, Obamacare would exacerbate it. With its rich subsidies, expansion of government programs, insistence that all insurance cover specific services (and some with no copayments at all), Obamacare would pour fuel on the fire of health inflation. It's one reason that even the chief actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services - a federal employee - predicts cost rises under the President's plan.
The White House has been sharp with its critics, demanding that they outline an alternative vision. Here's one: that Washington move decisions away from bureaucrats (be they corporate or government) and empower individuals and families. In other words, American health care should be more like the other five-sixths of the economy where consumers spend more of their own money - certainly much more than 12 cents on the dollar - and get more value for it.

Posted via email from The Blue Pelican

3/11/10, Democrats Warn Of Losses Over Health Care Arrogance »»

3/11/10, Campaign Update »»

3/11/10, Action Glenwood »»

3/11/10, Wray Fray Continues »»

3/11/10, Guilford County Chairman Skip Alston is the Greensboro News & Record's Whippin Boy »»

3/11/10, It Is Time For The Greensboro City Council To Take The TREBIC Blinders Off And Require Neighborhood Meetings »»

3/11/10, Jihad Watch director offers an update on Islamist terror »»

3/11/10, No First Amendment right in Smithfield? »»

From WTSB Radio's news page. Though I disagree with the proposed boycott, punishing business owners for the stupidity of a town, I do certainly agree that the right to peacefully assemble was abridged. Granted the right was squashed by a municipality, not Congress. The First Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Police Shut Down Patriots Day 9-11 Rally On Courthouse Steps
Event Organizers Plan Boycott Of Smithfield Businesses

Organizers of a peaceful 9-11 ?Patriots Day Tea Party? were shut down by Smithfield Police Friday afternoon. About 45 minutes after the event began on the Johnston County Courthouse steps, two Smithfield Police Officers arrived and told spectators the event was being held without a town permit and could not continue.

Birma Stemler, who spearheaded the Smithfield Patriots Day gathering, said she had been planning the event for four months and had been told by Smithfield Planning Director Paul Embler she did not need a permit. Later, Stemler claims Embler changed his mind in late-August, and said she would need Smithfield Town Council approval because a public address (PA) system would be used, but would have to wait to appear before the board in October. Stemler said October was too late for a 9-11 rally. As a courtesy, Stemler said she told a police lieutenant weeks ago about the rally.

Stemler did appear before Johnston County Commissioners on August 3, and was given permission by County Commissioners to hold the 9-11 event. According to minutes of the meeting, County Manager Rick Hester told Stemler he had no issues with a PA system but he wanted to make sure it would not disturb the court system that may be in session. In response, Stemler moved the timing of the event until after 5pm.

About 140 adults in attendance were shocked when police told them the event was not authorized by the Town of Smithfield. To protest the forceful police action, the group said they would boycott Smithfield businesses in response to the town?s decision to prevent them from holding a peaceful assembly on public property. ?I was told I could do this and there would be no problems,? Stemler told WTSB News. ?The officer argued with me, but did say I would not be arrested.?

Officer D.A. Tyndall was asked by a WTSB reporter, who sent the officers to the 9-11 gathering. He replied, ?The police department.? When asked again, who specifically at the police department sent him he again replied, ?The police department.?

Town Councilman Andy Moore, who was not present at the event, said he did not want anyone boycotting Smithfield businesses based on the actions of police. ?I will be talking with the city manager to see what went on and to see if we can work something out,? Moore told WTSB. ?Obviously I would not want anybody boycotting Smithfield businesses, especially during the touch economic conditions that we have.?

Chris Johnson, Executive Director of the Downtown Smithfield Development Corporation, who has overseen the revitalization of the downtown business district, said the thoughts of a boycott makes him cringe, but said he hopes cooler heads will prevail. ?Hopefully an amicable solution will be reached.? Johnson said the 9-11 event the group was trying to rally around would not occur for another year, and said he hoped it was a big misunderstanding. ?We ask that any citizen, not just this group, that has any problem with an elected official or city government, they would not take it out on the small independent businesses that are struggling in this economy.? Reached Friday night, Stemler said plans for the boycott still stand. She hopes others will join in the efforts to let town officials know the groups rights to assemble peacefully - protected in the US Constitution - were denied. One citizen said a lawsuit might be considered. WTSB Photos

Read more...

3/11/10, Cruising the Web »»

3/11/10, How to pass a bill without voting on it »»

3/11/10, »»

3/11/10, Ok, now this is just getting ridiculous »»

3/11/10, So where the Aitch have I been? Well... »»

3/11/10, Can Obama Escape the Taint of Blagojevich? - TIME »»

3/11/10, How Much For Your Wings? »»

3/11/10, Bill James Is At It Again »»

3/11/10, Seven Words .... Make That 119 You Can Never Say On The AIr »»

3/11/10, Statue of Responsibility? »»

3/11/10, Home Warranty: Yea or Nay? »»

1/15/10, Simply the Best Explanation of the Heath Care Crisis and Solutions »»

1/15/10, Hippy Heat »»

On more than one occasion I've been accused of being a granola crunching hippy. This is an observation that has always puzzled me. I don't have particularly long hair. I don't wear love beads and I don't smoke pot. I think people confuse me with a hippy because I am usually participating in activities that are a little offbeat to the mainstream suburbanites we associate with. For instance, we raise dairy goats, cattle and poultry. When I built our house I made it out of concrete (actually the term is ICF) and stained the concrete floors instead of carpeting them. We built beautiful porches all around our house, but we often use the back porch for agricultural activities like milking goats or storing bales of hay. In fact the banner on this blog is a picture of my son sitting on hay bales stacked on the back porch. But now I think I have finally found a new project that will definitely throw me over into the hippy category. We (used loosely) are going to build one of these to help heat our house.

I've been searching and researching for some time now for a good way to add an independent heating system to our home that would reduce our dependence on the utility company. Last year's ice storm convinced me that this was no longer something I could put off. As I searched high and low, I found the best way to provide clean and efficient heat is to store it in thermal mass. I already knew that because our house is thermal mass and once it heats up, it stays warm for a long time. In the summer the opposite is true too. So far this year we have yet to turn on out furnace, and the house has averaged about 67 degrees. My research took me first to masonry heaters a.k.a. Russian heaters. These heaters collect the heat that would normally go out through the chimney by running flue gases through a series of masonry baffles. I was sold on the concept and the beautiful heaters, and then I started pricing the materials. Just the firebrick needed for the firebox and core of the heater was more than I could afford, not to mention the brick or stone facade. In my research I happened across several mentions of rocket heaters, but the pictures were enough for me to say, "I don't think so." Most of them were minimal constructions with exposed 55 gallon steel drums, commonly used as a heat exchanger. Then I came across this one built by the administrator of a discussion group I joined called, Rocket Stoves.. Experimenters corner.. Answers questioned!

The internals of these heaters are built from materials that I have hidden away in my extensive collections and piles of materials that my wife calls "junk." The operating principle is the same as the Russian stoves with heat ducts routed through the thermal mass to cool the flue gases and heat the thermal mass which then radiates heat into the adjoining rooms slowly. The design of the rocket mass heaters usually includes routing the gases through a bench that you can sit or lay on and warm yourself directly. The thermal mass and the exterior of these heaters is built using cob. Cob is a mixture of clay, sand, water and straw that is mixed and kneaded into the consistency of cookie dough. It is then used to form beautiful pieces like this one. Cob dries very hard and is fireproof making it a perfect heat sink.

So, my first step in this process is to learn about cob and to see if I could come up with an inexpensive source of the right mixture of sand and clay to make it. The Cob Builders Handbook said to start looking on your own land. It describes a way to take a soil sample and mix it with water in a glass jar and then see the different layers that settle. Sand being heavier will settle to the bottom and clay and silt on top. The recipes for cob vary depending on the particular soil but as it turns out this formally coal mined land has about a 50/50 mix of clay and sand to make cob. I still have to sift the rocks out, but a little machine cloth should make that go quickly. Ideally, I understand that more sand is better.

Having determined that the soil needs a little more sand to make good cob, I set about mixing up several small test batches of cob with differing amounts of added sand to form test bricks. As you can see in the picture, the cob formed up nicely, and making these mud pies really brings back some childhood memories. The numbers on the bricks represent the mixture of soil to sand in the cob recipe.

As I go further along in the process, I will try to chronicle the project and post the progress right here. Our hope is to have everything ready to form up the cob when my two oldest girls, who are both very creative and artistic, come home in December for a visit. I hope they still like playing in mud.

3/11/10, A Mind is Terrible Thing to Waste »»

By: Theosebes

The little girl's shoulders shook as she tearfully hugged her big brother good bye. The mother stood by with her hand on her son's shoulder, painfully dealing with the transition from high school student to college freshman. The scene was touching and brought back personal memories of just a year ago as I too experienced this emotional release in 2008 when my daughter entered the university for the first time. Yet there was peace knowing that the college she was attending was built on this mission statement: "Biblically centered education, scholarship and service- equipping men and women in mind and character to impact the world for the Lord Jesus Christ."

The first institution in America was founded in 1636 by a Puritan named John Harvard. He left his library of 400 books to found a "seminary" with this understanding, "The maine end of [a student's] life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, John 17:3, and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all found knowledge and learning." (Samuel, Eliot Morison, The Founding of Harvard College). Today the mission statement for Harvard is vastly different. "In brief: Harvard strives to create knowledge, to open the minds of students to that knowledge, and to enable students to take best advantage of their educational opportunities." Harvard no longer espouses that the study of God and Jesus Christ is the foundation of all found knowledge and learning, but rather there is a denial of God and the belief that humans can create knowledge. Education has devolved from its superior beginnings in America when the Progressive agenda took root, walking away from the classical preparation that made the true pursuit of knowledge and truth foundational and moving toward an education of experience, resulting in an incremental ?dumbing down? of Americans dating back to the early twentieth century.

Parents today may send their children off to prestigious learning institution, feeling secure in the campus security, the dorm life, and the extra-curricular activities these schools may offer, but because parent's have also been indoctrinated into a Progressive mentality, it doesn't occur to them to be wary of the propaganda taught at most universities. Glenn Beck points out in Common Sense that the educational system has "fallen prey to political patronage and the Progressive agenda." Beck also quoted Woodrow Wilson, once president of Princeton University, (another one of America's first colleges founded to meet the needs of training ministers) who said, "Our problem is not merely to help the students to adjust themselves to world life....[but]to make them as unlike their fathers as we can." Beck, Glenn Common Sense, Pg 91.

When did the fathers of our country become unworthy of study and emulation? Who should we fashioning our lives after, if it is not the great men and women in history, our American history? Who should children view as worthwhile role models if it is not their fathers? When did the colleges and universities become enemies of the parent instead of a support system to help the child to succeed in becoming an adult?

According to Gary Amos and Richard Gardiner, in their book Never Before in History, the standard for graduation in the 1700s from Harvard was as follows:

Every student who, on trial, shall be able to translate from the original Latin text, and logically to explain the Holy Scriptures, both of the Old and New Testament, and shall also be thoroughly acquainted with the principles of natural and moral philosophy, and shall be blameless in life and character, and approved at public examination by the President and the Fellows of the College, may receive the first degree.

The Masters Degree required the following:

Every scholar who has maintained a good standing, and exhibited a written synopsis of logic, natural and moral philosophy, arithmetic and astronomy, and shall be prepared to defend a proposition or thesis; shall also be versed in the original languages, as aforesaid; and who carries with him a reputation for upright character and diligence in study, and shall pass successfully a public examination, shall be admitted to the second, or Master?s degree.

Today according to the Harvard website, graduation requirements to earn the bachelor?s degree, a student must complete 128 credits and maintain good academic standing (2.0 GPA). At least 64 credits must be completed at Harvard University. A student must fulfill all of his or her requirements and be in good academic and financial standing with Harvard University, with no disciplinary or administrative procedures pending, to graduate and participate in May Commencement. Each school of study of course has differing requirements for its emphasis,

but it is interesting to note the very different tone that one finds today at one of America?s most renowned universities and the requirements of two hundred years ago.

Most interesting is the requirement that the student must be upright and blameless in life and character and having a thorough knowledge of the Bible in the 1700?s Laws and Statutes for Students of Harvard College. One would be hard pressed to find such a high standard for graduation from any school today, let alone America?s oldest institution of higher learning: Harvard University.

Academic standards are set without regard for the character of the individual and no where is the Bible seen as an indispensable factor for a well rounded scholar.

Our lower institutions of learning have an even tougher climb to reach the excellence of early American schools. The New England Primer was the text book that emphasized both Christian charact

er and literacy and classical education was a standard for many colonial Americans, along with apprenticeships to provide skilled training.

Today?s classrooms would not be allowed to have a New E

ngland Primer, as it would offend those who believe in the separation of church and state. The Primer utilized Bible stories to help teach the alphabet and the Westminster Catechism was also part of the text. Samuel Eliot Morison said, ?American revolutionary leaders, both North and South, Madison, Wythe, and Jefferson, the Rutledges and Pinckneys, as well as Hamilton, Jay, and the Adamses, and Trumbulls, could never have rendered their distinguished services to the young republic without that classical leaning which is denied to most Americans today. (Samuel Eliot Morison, Three Centuries of Harvard (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1936), 136.

How do we expect our children to excel in grade school, middle school and high school when the standards of education are at an all time low? When Progressivism has a choke hold on real education, when indoctrination is the ring of the school bell, and the diploma of good citizenship is given to a student who can spew out the correct responses on a test that measures the ability to think green, distrust the government and treat people equally. We are not raising an army of brilliant thinkers as the founding fathers were, but rather a generation whose work ethic, morality and character are easy to mold by those who believe they know what is best. Yet this ?knowing? leadership also attended the schools of Progressive instruction and they too are not in the same league as the excellent scholars, thinkers and statesmen that the Founders were.

How can we as parents pursue an education for our children, that reflects excellence and strives for a standard that few achieve, a standard that early Americans set and achieved? We as parents do know what is best for our children, even in regard to education, though the local school district and the Obama Administration would say the contrary. American schools are failing our children not because students are not learning to read, write and do basic math, but because the standard of excellence, the standard of ?blameless in life and character? is not the key element in a child?s life. When we take away the foundation of Biblical scholarship and morality and replace it with an ever changing ideology of humanism, then the goal becomes only to clone robots who espouse the philosophy of the powers that be. When high moral character and biblical ethics are separated from the education of a child, only the outer shell will appear polished. Test scores may reflect understanding and in academics that child may find success, but the inner person will struggle for meaning that was never addressed in this pursuit of knowledge.

A wholly educated person is educated in mind, body and spirit and is a danger to the Progressive agenda, because that person has the ability to reason, to consider ethical ramifications and to speak against the wrongs that the government is foisting on the ?tired and huddled masses?. This is why education is the most crucial weapon that we have as parents and that the Progressive desire to hold in complete control. There is recognition that if the masses can be educated just enough to know how to follow their ?teachers?, then an army of ?yes men? can be established. This is why parents must do their due diligence to be connected with their child through every part of schooling, even the choosing of the university. This too should becomes a family affair as the family releases the life, mind, and spirit of their child to an institution that will either reinforce the values of the family unit and build it into a stronger entity, or will do the work of a cancer and slowly destroy the value system of that individual, creating in that student an individual who questions the loving authority that nurtured it and instilling a group think mentality focused on experience and skills needed for a future society.

The future of America is in the children that we raise. Mediocre is not an option. Parents must become more deeply engaged in the philosophy of the educational process, as well as breaking the chains that have imprisoned our minds as well. We must re-educate ourselves, recognizing that we all have had a dose of Progressive indoctrination, and we must return to the educational pattern that helped establish this nation. Those who rule on high in Washington are products of this century old heist of the American mind. Like the old proverb, they too have been the frog, slowing dying in an ever warming pot of water. But the fire can be extinguished and the death of brilliant minds stopped. It is not too late to stop the march of this Statist ideology but it must become personal and we must return to the pursuit of truth that Harvard was built on at its inception: "The maine end of [a student's] life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, John 17:3, and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all found knowledge and learning.? Without this foundation, we may truly say, the mind is a terrible thing to waste.

3/11/10, California Appeals Court Stands for English Only »»

By Theosebes

In 1914, President Theodore Roosevelt stated, "We have room for but one language in this country, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding house."

Last week, the First District Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected arguments that English-only exams violate a federal requirement that limited-English-speaking students "shall be assessed in a valid and reliable manner." Nearly 1.6 million students in California have limited command of the language, according to a OneNewsNow article. The court of appeals, in a three-to-zero ruling, upheld a San Francisco judge?s decision that ruled against the bilingual-education group in his 2007 decision.

The lawyer for the school district, Marc Coleman stated that they are considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court. But Aloysius Hogan, a spokesman for English First, thinks that due to the solid three-to-zero ruling this would be a tough challenge.

Last week, I had the privilege of introducing a ten year old Ukrainian boy to a group of school children. This young man was adopted by a couple last December and knew absolutely no English when he arrived aside from ?hello, yes, no, and mommy and papa.? The day of the assembly, he spoke in very good English to a group of children his age and fielded the questions that these children had for him about the orphanage he had lived in and about Ukraine. His native tongue is Russian and he had been learning to read Russian. Here in his new home, he had to learn a new alphabet and is now reading very well for only being here for eight months.

Credit goes to his parents, I am sure, for their dedication in helping him learn the language so quickly. But this young man has had a much more difficult life than most children ever experience in the United States and is already putting the majority of bi-lingual children and adults to shame.

If an orphan child can come to a new land, learn a new alphabet, learn to read and speak in English, in eight months, then why can?t a high school or any elementary school child do the same? I would suggest that there is laziness and a lack of care. The examples these children have at home demonstrate arrogance for not adopting the language that defines America and its heritage. There is no reason other than laziness and pride that keeps individuals back from learning the language of the land. With effort, the lives of the adults and children who do not have a command of the language would improve by making it easier to live in a country with a single language, making it easier to be neighborly and do day to day tasks in the community.

I agree with the Court's decision and believe that pressure needs to be applied to the homes of non-English speakers, holding them responsible for getting their children ready for the world. It is not the government?s job, but rather the individual who chooses to live in the United States of America.

3/11/10, With a whimper »»

3/11/10, HP CRE again »»

3/11/10, Huddleston to D'Annunzio: Time to bow out »»

3/11/10, Rivals blast McHenry in flap over census »»

3/11/10, Bill Friday, nearly 90, still teaching »»

3/11/10, New N.C. State chief jabs a few stakes in the ground »»

New N.C. State chief jabs a few stakes in the ground

Randy Woodson, incoming chancellor at N.C. State University, was in town this week to make the rounds, including spending the day with legislative leaders Tuesday, breakfasting with former Gov. Jim Hunt (and and N.C. State grad) and dropping by the News & Observer to chat with reporters and editors. Woodson showed right off the bat a willingness to talk candidly about academic matters at N.C. State, the largest public university in North Carolina. In his words, he stuck a few stakes in the ground to make points about the university. Among them:

-- He thinks N.C. State has become "a bit risk averse" in academic matters and that it should take more risks that make an impact upon the state and the nation -- for example, declaring a goal for the university's program to become the best anywhere in chemical engineering, say, or other disciplines. "Academic risk is where you ? put a stake in the ground" and say you're going to the next level. That includes budget choices, and some departments clearly need to grow to meet challenges. "It's time to decide where you're going to expand" -- and N.C. State needs a clearly articulated strategic plan that includes targets and measurements.

-- N.C. State's endowment, he says, is far too small and ought to be three times as large. N.C. State, he said, "has one of the smallest endowments of a research university? that I've ever seen." On paper, he noted, the endowment is $400 million, but $100 million of that is land. So the investment endowment that produces income is about $300 million. It ought to be, he said, $1 billion. He also sounds unconvinced that N.C. State's model of school-based foundations raising money is the best way to proceed. "It's very unusual," he said and added, "It doesn't appear to have been very effective."

-- And the university's faculty, he thinks, is too small. North Carolina's high schools are graduating more students, creating demand for space in higher education, and a larger endowment will help attract the best faculty and keep them to serve the students.

-- The N.C. State freshman class generally has about 9 or 10 percent out-of-state students, considerably less than the 18 percent allowed by state policy. He'd like to see N.C. State's freshman class proportion of out-of-state students rise because of the mix of intellect and experience a broader mix of students brings to the class and to the state.
Read more...

3/11/10, Gubernatorial Approval Ratings »»

For most of last year Bev Perdue was one of the most unpopular Governors in the country, but that's no longer the case. It's not that the voters have warmed up to her- her 30% approval rating is still very poor- but the rest of the Governors have caught up to her in unpopularity.

Our last North Carolina poll found 47% of voters in the state disapproving of Perdue. The average disapproval on 21 Governors we've polled over the last six months is 45%. So there's really not much difference between her unpopularity and that of the average Governor anymore.

There's no doubt it's a tough time to be a Governor. The average approval spread on the ones we've looked at lately is 37/45. Here are some notes on those numbers:

-It's better to be a small state Governor. The three we've found over 50 recently are Sean Parnell in Alaska, Mike Beebe in Arkansas, and Mike Rounds in South Dakota.

-It's really tough to be a big state Governor. Out of the 11 Governors we've looked at in states that have 10 or more electoral votes only Tim Kaine at 46% while he was still in office and Jay Nixon at 42% have positive approval ratings. 7 of the 11 have disapproval numbers over 50.

-The five least popular Governors we've tested are Bill Richardson, Deval Patrick, Jim Doyle, John Baldacci, and Jon Corzine while he was still in office. The only one of those folks running this year is Patrick and I have a really hard time seeing him getting reelected even with three serious candidates in the race.

Here's the full data by approval rating:

Governor	Approval Rating
Mike Beebe (D-Arkansas)	59/22
Sean Parnell (R-Alaska)	58/19
Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota)	55/32
Jodi Rell (R-Connecticut)	49/39
Tim Kaine (D-Virginia)	46/39
Jay Nixon (D-Missouri)	42/25
Jack Markell (D-Delaware)	40/31
Bill Ritter (D-Colorado)	38/50
Steve Beshear (D-Kentucky)	36/39
Mark Sanford (R-South Carolina)	36/51
Charlie Crist (R-Florida)	35/51
Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)	34/57
Rick Perry (R-Texas)	33/50
Bev Perdue (D-North Carolina)	30/47
Sonny Perdue (R-Georgia)	29/52
Jim Doyle (D-Wisconsin)	29/57
Bill Richardson (D-New Mexico)	28/63
Jan Brewer (R-Arizona)	26/43
Pat Quinn (D-Illinois)	25/55
John Baldacci (D-Maine)	25/57
Deval Patrick (D-Massachusetts)	22/59

3/11/10, More thoughts on Florida »»

3/11/10, Master of Disaster »»

3/11/10, Eeesh »»

3/11/10, Timeline: What Were Dem Leaders Told About Massa? »»

Since the House vote today to refer to the ethics committee the question of what Democratic leaders knew about former Rep. Eric Massa before news of harassment allegations broke publicly, it's worth looking at the timeline of what we know so far.

At some point in or before October 2009, Massa took out to dinner a member of Rep. Barney Frank's committee staff, Frank said in a statement today. The staffer told another Frank staffer, who in turn told Frank's co-chief of staff, Maria Giesta.

"Although this was not an ethical violation, Maria did think it should be called to the attention of former Congressman Massa's Chief of Staff, Joe Racalto, a former colleague," according to Frank's statement.

Racalto replied that he already knew about the episode and was mulling what to do. Frank said the staffer told him today that "nothing improper" occurred during the dinner with Massa.

According to the Washington Post, Racalto believed the meal fit a pattern of Massa "trying to spend time alone with young gay men with no ostensible work purpose."

So in October, Racalto called Speaker Nancy Pelosi's director of member services to express concerns about Massa's behavior, including the meal with the staffer and that Massa was "living with several young, unmarried male staffers and using sexually explicit language with them," according to the Post.

Citing an unnamed Pelosi aide, Politico reported that Racalto told the Pelosi staffer that Massa "hired too many staff members," and that he had asked Massa to move out of the group living situation.

The fact that Massa lived with five staffers was also reported in a day-in-the-life profile in a local New York newspaper on Oct. 9. It's not clear how, if at all, that report was connected to Racalto's decision to go to Pelosi's office.

Also in October, Racalto told the Elmira Star-Gazette, Massa wrote a memo to his staff apologizing for "chronic use of inappropriate language and pledging to hold himself to a higher standard."

However, in his radio monologue last Sunday, Massa himself told a similar story but said it occurred in January:

"In January, I said something that was out of bounds. I said I had to go lick lollipops to raise money. Now you can use your imagination to know what I actually said. ... And I actually had someone on the staff say, 'Come on now, boss.' And I said you're right, I'm sorry. And I wrote a document and directed the chief of staff to have every member of my staff sign it, and I was the first signature. And it was a document to hold us to a higher standard in my office and in my own personal behavior."

The week of February 8, Massa's deputy chief of staff told the staff of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer about allegations of sexual misconduct by Massa, Hoyer told Politico March 3. Hoyer told his staff to tell Massa's staff to take the matter to the ethics committee, according to a statement from Hoyer's office.

"Within 48 hours, Mr. Hoyer received confirmation from both the Ethics Committee staff and Mr. Massa's staff that the Ethics Committee had been contacted and would review the allegations," Hoyer's statement says.

It is not publicly known what specific allegations were brought to Hoyer's staff.

On March 3, Massa announced he was not seeking reelection for health reasons. Politico broke the news that day that sexual harassment allegations had been made against Massa.

The ethics committee announced March 4 it was investigating unspecified allegations against Massa.

The GOP resolution referred to the ethics committee today directs the committee to investigate "which House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs had knowledge prior to March 3, 2010 of the aforementioned allegations concerning Mr. Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer having any such knowledge took after learning of the allegations."

3/11/10, New York Cancels Queens 'Racino' Deal With Jay-Z-Linked Group »»

3/11/10, Attention Detroit automakers: »»

3/11/10, two weeks later... »»

3/11/10, Blond-Blue-Eyed Killer »»

3/11/10, Paul Ryan For President? »»

3/11/10, The Facade of Airline Security: How Many Shots Are In Your Bottle of Rum? »»

Featured - RunSmart2Win

Let’s Revisit Those Ten Campaign Themes to Watch in 2010, Shall We?
The morning after the biggest political upset imaginable — in...
How the 2010 Election Will be Won by Blogs and Tweets
On Monday, Jessica posted her “Ten Twitter Tips for Campaigns...

Featured - Jane Q. Republican

North Carolina Juggernaut
Bert Burnette from Oriental, NorthCarolina has come up with...
Message For The Day

Featured - Carolina Politics Online

Candidate Questionnaire for Paul Thurmond, Republican for South Carolina’s First Congressional District
A few weeks back I sent out some candidate questionnaires...
Britt Blackwell Shakes up Sixth District York Council Race
While most of our York County discussions typically center around...

Featured - Guarino

Kay Hagan's Liberal Church
A couple of days ago, I posted about an article...
Paying the Landfill Price
One of the big questions in local politics this week...

Featured - BlogTalkRadio

US Grand Jury - Mar 11,2010
U.S. GRAND JURY BLOGTALK IS IN SESSION! This week's show will...
Do The Right Thing Ministry - Politics from a Christian Perspective - Mar 10,2010
Who says Politics and Christianity don't mix? We think it...
Interview with Steve Forbes - Mar 10,2010
Steve Forbes is President and CEO of Forbes and Editor-in-Chief...
Interview: Dr. Larry Schweikart - Mar 10,2010
PV Radio welcomes author and Professor of History Larry Schweikart!...

Featured - Meck Deck

How Does 7 Million More Foreclosures Sound?
Wonderful news on the real estate front. Banks have something...
Foxx: “The national poster child for recovery”
Huh? Is the mayor talking about Charlotte? The city with the...

Featured - Katy's Conservative Corner

7 Dumbest Ways to Accessorize Your Car
A website entitled Guyism has a post entitled The 7...
Reader Mail: Oil/Gas Exploration Points by Kent Misegades
On Saturday, your blogger posted an update from NC Senate...

Featured - Red Clay Citizen

We're Moving! Update your bookmarks to Civitasreview.com
We are in the process of moving Red Clay Citizen...
Obama's War on Seniors
I blogged before about the Obama administration's blood lust for...