The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that the RICO statute couldn’t be used to “against protesters at abortion clinics.” Predictably, both sides had immediate reactions to the ruling:

Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, charged that by vacating a nationwide injunction against abortion clinic protesters “on narrow, technical grounds, the Supreme Court sided today with thugs and bullies, not peaceful protesters.” Mrs. Gandy held that the injunction “contributed to the dramatic reduction in clinic violence that we have witnessed in recent years.” She noted that the 1998 injunction was imposed after a Chicago jury found that clinic demonstrators had engaged in a pattern of racketeering by interfering with clinic operations, damaging clinic property, menacing doctors and assaulting patients. Mrs. Gandy said that if yesterday’s ruling “ushers in a return to clinic violence in the United States, NOW stands ready to fight in every jurisdiction.”

Pro-lifers exulted in the decision.

“Naturally, I am gratified to be vindicated once again by the U.S. Supreme Court,” Joseph M. Scheidler, national director of the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League and petitioner in the case, Scheidler vs. NOW. He said the Supreme Court was “right” in 2003 when it initially lifted a nationwide injunction against clinic protests by pro-life groups. “But NOW refused to acknowledge defeat. They convinced the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to keep the case alive in spite of the Supreme Court’s clear mandate to end it,” Mr. Scheidler said.

Frankly, it’s more than melodramatic for NOW to say that “clinic demonstrators had engaged in a pattern of racketeering by interfering with clinic operations, damaging clinic property, menacing doctors and assaulting patients” or that the Supreme Court’s ruling might usher in “a return to clinic violence in the United States…”

If she didn’t think it might lead to increased violence, then the only other explanation for her saying that was to play the ‘fear card’. I guess that that’s certainly possible considering the circumstances. (continue reading post »)

Look, for starters, his budget is lousy. His Judicial appointments are worse, his plans are comical, Susan Kennedy is a disaster, and the crap he pulled at the GOP Convention was ridiculous.

It is a target rich environment… you don’t need to stretch to find something to be upset with the Governor over. Try starting with the fact that he has gone so far left after the special that he is barely discernable as a RINO, let alone a Republican.

But for God’s sake, put the Kool-Aid down… the fact that Arnold quoted and agreed with Hillary Clinton dosen’t mean squat. The fact that Arnold is to the left of Hillary on the Environment for example, does. Focus…

This is an article I got several times that is being cited as the basis for the hysterics on the Right to think that Arnold is going to Divorce Maria and run off with Hillary… to where? Brokeback Mountain!? Give me a break… I swear that Kool-Aid should be federally regulated.

Schwarzenegger alluded to the split when Russert asked him if he’d run for re-election this year as a Bush Republican.

“I will run as an Arnold Republican, which is that I am there to govern and to serve the people of California, meaning Democrats and Republicans…,” Schwarzenegger said.

This is the comment that should have stirred alarm… it’s all about Arnold once again. You’d think that after getting drubbed in the special Arnold would learn a lesson…

Publisher’s note: Click on the link for the full news article by the APs Erica Werner

Cross-posted at Roseville Conservative

Makes you wonder what the parents carry…*

And that, ladies and gents, is what we’re dealing with.

Michelle Malkin has more.

RELATED:
The Forbidden Cartoons: A Striking Resemblance

My first California Republican Party convention was in July, 1966 (not a typo). I have seen lots of them, some more important than others. The just concluded convention sets the foundation for the conservative revival within the Party structure.

Here is what did occur at the convention:

1. The CRP, by unanimous vote, declared that the Governor has been wrong in appointing so many non-Republicans to the bench–the McClintock position

2. Even though the Resolutions Committee passed to the floor a measure supporting the Governors deficit budget (imagine a GOP committee applauding deficit spending) thanks to Assemblyman Chuck DeVore that was changed. Instead the CRP opposed deficit spending and unbalanced budgets–the McClintock position

3. The Resolutions Committee passed a resolution in favor of infrastructure needs (which we all agree on) but refused to oppose $68 billion in General Obligation bonds–massive indebtedness for future generations to pay, instead of a “pay as you go” system advocated by the Assembly Republican Caucus. The convention, instead of passing this, sent it to the Initiatives Committee–again, the McClintock position (he strongly opposes General Obligation bonds).

4. There was an effort to pass a Rules change, proposed by Chairman Duf Sundheim, to allow the Executive Committee to hold its meetings and allow votes in conference calls. The effect of this would be to allow the Chairman to call “emergency” meetings of the Executive Committee and vote for or against Initiative measures. For instance, Duf could call a meeting to support $68 billion in General Obligation bonds and the committee with as little as 26 votes (out of the over 1400 members of the CRP) put us on record against the Assembly and Senate Republicans, and the vast majority of the Base of the Party). (continue reading post »)

Once again, there is reason to believe in Iraq. Last Wednesday, terrorists posing as police bombed one of the Shiite’s holiest sites, the 1,200 year old Golden Dome mosque in Samarra, setting off an unprecedented spasm of sectarian violence that left almost 130 people dead.

This, of course, has everyone talking about an Iraqi Civil War. However, Iraqis have stepped up to the plate and taken control in remarkable ways. The soldiers on the scene who secured vulnerable areas were all Iraqi troops and Iraqi police. The Iraqi government made the decision to lock down Baghdad imposing a daytime curfew…. just 2 years ago it was the United States making such decisions.

Both Shiites and Sunnis for unity and condemned killings of Iraqis. Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, said those who carried out Wednesday’s bombing at the Askariya shrine in the city of “do not represent the Sunnis in Iraq.” Instead of taking the bait and falling for the trap, Al-Hakim instead blamed insurgents and al-Qaeda followers of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi instead of Sunnis. Hakim said:

“We all have to unite in order to eliminate them. This is what al-Zarqawi is working for, that is, to ignite sectarian strife in the country. We call for self-restraint. It was the right of Shiites in Iraq to express their anger through peaceful means and to call for putting an end to such flagrant attacks against the conscience of the nation and its holy places. The angry reaction led to attacks on mosques of our Sunni brothers in different parts of Baghdad and led to the death of dozens of them and there were also attacks against Shiites in other areas. We declare our rejection of any attack against a Sunni or a Shiite mosque in Iraq and we also condemn killing Iraqis.”

Sunnis and Shiite, understanding the enemy was not each other, joined in worship together and joined in prayer. 24 Steps to Liberty living in Iraq gave this great commentary of the unprecedented alliance: (continue reading post »)

So far today, I’ve come across more propaganda today than I can handle. Here’s what I’ve found:

One article tries telling us that two thirds of Americans think that President Bush isn’t doing a good job. Another tries telling us that Americans hate high gas prices when oil companies charge high prices but they don’t mind it if their government taxes them more. Finally, a newspaper thinks it has a right to see “highly classified” documents that would leave us far more vulnerable against terrorist attacks.

The CBS poll that just came out is nothing more than propaganda. I can’t even call it bad polling because calling it that would denigrate bad polls like AP-Ipsos.

First off, the poll was taken Feb. 22-26. In other words, the polling is skewed by part of it being conducted over the weekend.

Second of all, it’s badly skewed with the representation of political parties. According to their own breakdown:

• “Total Republicans” contacted: 272 unweighted and 289 weighted or 28% of the sample.
• “Total Democrats” contacted: 409 unweighted and 381 weighted or 37% of the sample.
• “Total Independents” contacted: 337 unweighted and 348 weighted or 33% of the sample.

Worse yet is that the poll wasn’t of registered voters or likely voters. So who cares what this propaganda tool says?

This story taken by itself is bothersome but it gets worse when taken in context. Let’s look further into the propaganda business. Here’s the opening paragraph in a NY Times article:

Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to a higher federal gasoline tax, but a significant number would go along with an increase if it reduced global warming or made the United States less dependent on foreign oil, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

What type of question would produce that type of result? People are vehemently opposed to higher gas prices when they think it’s the result of oil company’s price-gouging but they’re cool with paying more at the pump when the government steals the money? Surely they don’t expect us to be that stupid, do they?
(continue reading post »)

The people at the American Spectator seem to think that something might break in the NSA Leak Scandal. Here’s a glimpse into their article:

Word out of the Defense Intelligence Agency and law enforcement sources has the FBI and the Department of Justice comparing notes and dates on who in the U.S. Senate received national security briefings on both the overseas terrorist prisons and the NSA overseas terrorist monitoring programs, and when those briefings took place. “The number of Senators who received briefings is not as large as people think,” says one law enforcement source. “These were programs with a limited ‘Need to Know” list on Capitol Hill.”
———-
Focus of the investigation remains on the staffs of two Senators, Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Sen. Dick Durbin, as well as committee staff for the Senate Intelligence Committee and career intelligence staff detailed to U.S. Senate offices and committees.

Insiders have suspected that Rockefeller was one of the leakers for awhile now, which makes sense. He’s the person that developed a plan to politicize an intelligence report about whether the WH unduly pressured intelligence. He’s also the guy that leaked a letter he typed on the NSA matter that he said was so top secret that he couldn’t put it on his computer. It was so secret that he couldn’t even have his secretary type it up.

I hope that the investigation hands down indictments against Rockefeller and any of his staffers who leaked this information.

Cross-post at LetFreedomRing

Yup. It has finally happened… Moderate Republicans like to brag about their fiscal Conservatism.

The Same Moderates named Lincoln Chaffee (wait, he is a mis-registered Democrat)… The Same Moderates named John McScam (who thinks he should be president), Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Mike DeWine that voted against Budget Cuts to reduce the defecit they have been whining about.

Excuse me, Fiscal Conservatism equals smaller Government. While I have taken umbrage about W’s big spending ways the first few years he was in office… what now!?

In California at our “Spring” Convention the same Moderate hypocricy was on display. Moderates rail on us Conservatives for being Bible thumping Theocrats. Okay, let’s put the social issues aside…

The “California Congress of Republicans” is the major Moderate group in California. They endorsed Arnold’s re-election. No Problem there… but where the problem starts is what the Governor is proposing this year for his budget.

Arnold wants to borrow $222 billion to build infastructure. First off, the REPUBLICAN Assembly has proposed an alternative plan that will ‘live within our means’ and pay as we go for infastructure projects. I brought a resolution to the California Republican Party Convention that said, let’s look at alternative proposals before taking out a huge mortgage. Given California’s lousy credit rating, this seems to be a sound idea…

My Brother brought a resolution calling for a balanced Budget. This is pointed as we still have structural defecits of about 4.8 Billion in our budget according to Arnold in his speech at the CRP Convention.

The Kool-Aid was flowing big time. (continue reading post »)

The latest in the rumor mill regarding a possible step down for VP Dick Cheney comes from Insight Magazine. They write:

Vice President Dick Cheney is expected to retire within a year.

Senior GOP sources envision the retirement of Mr. Cheney in 2007, months after the congressional elections. The sources said Mr. Cheney would be persuaded to step down as he becomes an increasing political liability to President Bush.

The sources reported a growing rift between the president and vice president as well as their staffs. They cited Mr. Cheney’s failure to immediately tell the president of the accidental shooting of the vice president’s hunting colleague earlier this month. The White House didn’t learn of the incident until 18 hours later.

Mr. Cheney’s next crisis could take place by the end of the year, the sources said. They said the White House was expecting Mr. Cheney to defend himself against charges from his former chief of staff, Lewis Libby, that the vice president ordered him to relay classified information. Such a charge could lead to a congressional investigation and even impeachment proceedings.

“Nothing will happen until after the congressional elections,” a GOP source said. “After that, there will be significant changes in the administration and Cheney will probably be part of that.”

The rumors about a possible Cheney resignation have persisted throughout his tenure as Vice President - for example, back in October during the height of la affaire de pLame, US News reported that “government officials and advisers” were fueling the grapevine with speculation that Cheney would step down.

If the latest scuttlebutt on this proves to be true, I doubt it will have much - if anything - to do with any pressure on the part of the President to push Cheney into stepping down. Bush is nothing if not loyal, and I believe he wouldn’t try to exert any influence one way or the other on Cheney’s decision.

A Cheney resignation would put the left in a bit of a quandry as he — along with Karl Rove — have been on their political hit lists going back to before the President was inaugurated the first time. They consider having him in office as a Republican weakness on which they can capitalize. But if he steps down, they Congressional left would be in the position of helping to either approve or disapprove his successor - the person who could very well be considered a contender for the office of the Presidency come ‘08. The Congressional right would be chomping at the bit to get someone in that seat who they think could breathe new life into Republican party supporters who are tired from weathering so many storms on behalf of both Cheney and the President.

Professor Bainbridge has posted a just for kicks poll which asks the question: “If Dick Cheney Resigns, Who Should Bush Pick as the Next VP?” — make sure to cast your vote.

Cross-posted at SisterToldjah

Drumroll please…

Senator Abel “Maldo” Maldonado.

Yup, I could have sworn I saw the Kool Aid ring stretching from his lips while I was at the convention.

Maldo ran all over the convention telling a sob story about how his Father came to America on the “Vaquero” program. (I could have the name wrong)

He shared how his Dad bought a house while working for minimum wage. WHAT!!!

Even in the 50’s and 60’s there was no way in hell you could buy a house let alone a car on the Minimum Wage. My own Father told me a story about his first job being for $.75 an hour. Tell me how you could buy a $3,500 new car on that kind of wage?

Come on Maldo… what’s worse is that he told that same sob story in efforts to kill mine and my brother’s resolutions to the CRP, because mine, George’s and one against the minimum wage were all combined into one resolution package.

I talked to my good friend Craig DeLuz that told me that every time Minimum wage goes up, those who lose their jobs are single Black and Latino people. He cited studies that he has read.

At the Resolutions Committee meeting, two black members of that committee got up and incinuated as did Maldo that if you oppose a minimum wage increase, you are racist. Really? Given what Craig Said, the racist position is raising minimum wage.

Me a racist? Go ahead and cuss me out in Spanish and tell me what a racist I am… If you don’t speak or write Spanish, then what’s your problem? (continue reading post »)